































rritories 





; 


hig 
at ee 
‘ Spese 
ai 
. 
4 
f 
A - 
V 


os ¥ 
























































































































































Return this book on or before the 
Latest Date stamped below. 


Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books 
are reasons for disciplinary action and may 
result in dismissal from the University. 


University of Illinois Library 


Sry ag ng 109 
Pri af 


“AD & livit 


a 


L161— O-1096 








LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY OFOHEINOIS 


, RBANA 
HON. HORACE® MANN, 


ON 


THE RIGHT OF CONGRESS TO LEGISLATE FOR THE 
TERRITORIES OF THE UNITED STATES, 


AND ITS 


DUTY TO EXCLUDE SLAVERY THEREFROM: 


DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, IN COMMITTEE 
OF THE WHOLE, JUNE 30, 1848. : 


TO WHICH IS ADDED, 


A LETTER FROM 


HON. MARTIN VAN BUREN, 


AND 


REV, JOSHUA LHAVITT. 


ees eer rere 


‘ BOSTON: 
J. HOWE, PRINTER, 39 MERCHANTS ROW. 


eeartrorseeoeeeeoteo eee ee 8 





“03 ag ye sf, eine iD, a0 wh 
a aay ve 


ale 


EAE racine oe 
“ 


1 tee Nee nm! ani 





SPROW 


Fg 


SPEECHs 





Mr. Cuatrman :—I have listened with interest, both yesterday 
and to-day, to speeches on what is called the “ Presidential ques- 
tion.” I propose to discuss a question of far greater magnitude— 
the question of the age—one, whose consequences wil] not end with 
the ensuing four years, but will reach forward to the setting of the 
sun of time. 

Sir, our position is this: The United States finds itself the owner 
ofa vast region of country at the West, now almost vacant of in- 
habitants. Parts of this region are salubrious and fertile. We 
have reason to suppose that, in addition to the treasures of wealth 
which industry may gather from its surface, there are mineral treas- 
ures beneath it—riches garnered up of old in subterranean cham- 
bers, and only awaiting the application of intelligence and skill to 
be converted into the means of human improvement and happiness. 
These regions, it is true, lie remote from our place of residence. 
Their shores are washed by another sea, and it is no figure of speech 
to say that another sky bends over them. So remote are they, that 
their hours are not as our hours, nor their day as our day; and yet, 
such are the wonderful improvements in art, in modern times, as to 
make: it no rash anticipation that before this century shall have 
closed, the inhabitants on the Atlantic shores will be able to visit 
their brethren on the Pacific, in ten days; and that intelligence will 
be transmitted and returned, between the Eastern and the Western 
oceans, in ten minutes. That country, therefore, will be rapidly 
filled, and we shall be brought into intimate relations with it; and, 
notwithstanding its distance, into proximity to it. 

Now, in the providence of God, it has fallen to our Jot to legislate 
for this unoccupied, or but partially occupied, expanse. Its great 
Futare hangs upon our decision. Not only degrees of latitude and 
longitude, but vast tracts of time—ages and centuries—seem at our 
disposal]. As are the institutions which we form and establish there, 
so will be the men whom these institutions, in their turn, will form. 
Nature works by fixed laws; but we can bring this or that combi- 
nation of circumstances under the operation of her laws, and thus 
determine results. Here springs up our responsibility. One class 
of institutions will gather there, one class of men who will develope 
one set of characteristics ; another class of institutions will gather 
there, another class of men who will develope other characteristics, 
Hence, their futurity is to depend upon our present course. Hence 
the acts we are to perform, seem to partake of the nature of crea- 
tion, rather than of legislation. Standing upon the elevation which 
we now occupy, and looking over into that empty world, “yet 
void,” if not “ without form,” but soon to be filled with multitu- 


a” 


4 


dinous life, and reflecting upon our power to give form and charac- 
ter to that life, and almost to fore-ordain what it shall be, I feel as 
though it would be no irreverence to compare our condition to that of 
the Creator before he fashioned the “lord” of this lower world; for 
we, like Him, can engraft one set of attributes, or another set of at- 
tributes, upon a whole race of men. In approaching this subject, 
therefore, I feel a sense of responsibility corresponding to the in- 
finite—I speak literally—the infinite interests which it embraces. 

As far as the time allowed me will permit, I propose to discuss 
two questions; the first is, “ Whether Congress can lawfully legis- 
late on the subject of slavery in the Territories 2” 

On this question a new and most extraordinary doctrine has lately 
been broached. A new reading of the Constitution has been dis- 
covered. It is averred that the 3d section of the 4th article, giving 
Congress power “to dispose of.and make all needful rules and reg- 
ulations respecting the territory, or other property belonging to the 
United States,” only gives power to legislate for the land, as land. 
It is admitted that Congress may legislate for the land as land— 
geologically or botanically considered—perhaps for the beasts that 
roam upon its surface, or the fishes that swim in its waters; but it is 
denied that Congress possesses any power to determine the laws 
and the institutions of those who shall inhabit that ‘ Jand.” 

But compare this with any other object of purchase or possession. 
When Texas was admitted into the Union, it transferred its “navy” 
to the United States; in other words,.the United States bought, and, 
of course, owned the navy of Texas. What power had Congress 
over this navy after the purchase ? According to the new doctrine, 
it could pass laws for the hull, the masts, and the sails of the Texan 
ships, but would have no power te.navigate them by officers and men. 
It might govern the ships as so much wood, iron, and cordage, but 
would have no authority over commanders or crews. 

But we are challenged to show any clause in the Constitution 
which confers an express power to legislate over the territories we 
possess. We challenge our opponents to show any clause which 
confers express power to acquire those territories themselves. If, 
then, the power to acquire exists, it exists by implication and infer-. 
ence ; and if the power to acquire be an implied one, the power to 
govern what is acquired must be implied also. For, for what pur- 
pose does any man acquire property but to govern and control it? 
Whet does a buyer pay for, if it be not the right to “ dispose of 2” 
Such is the doctrine of the Supreme Court of the United States: 
“The right to govern,” says Chief Justice Marshall, “may be the 
inevitable consequence of the right to acquire.” Amer. Ins. Co. vs. 
Canter, 1 Peters, 542. See also, McCullough vs. Maryland, 4 
Wheat., 422; The Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia, 5 Peters, 44; 
United States vs. Gratiot, 14 Peters,.537. 

But I refer to the express words of the Constitution, as ample and 
effective in conferring all the power that is claimed. Congress 
may dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations,” &. 
If Congress may “dispose of” this land, then it may sell it. Insep- 


9) 


arable from the right to sell is the right to define the terms of sale. 
The seller may affix such conditions and limitations as he pleases to 
the thing sold. If this be not so, then the buyer may dictate his 
terms to the seller. Answer these simple questions: Does the 
United States own land in fee-simple? Is the Government of the 
United States under guardianship, or disabled by minority ? Is it 
compes mentis? If none of these disabilities apply to it, then it 
may sell;—it may sell the fee-simple, or it may carve out any lesser 
estate, and sell that. It may incorporate such terms and conditions 
as it pleases into its deed or patent of sale. It may make an out- 
right quit-claim, or it may reserve the minerals for its own use, or 
the navigable streams for public highways, as it has done in the ter- 
ritory northwest of the river Ohio. It may insert the conditions and 
limitations in each deed or patent; or, where the grantees are nu- 
merous, it may make general “rules and regulations,” which are 
understood to be a part of each contract, and are therefore binding 
upon each purchaser. No man is compelled to buy; but if any one 
does buy, he buys subject to the “rules and regulations” expressed 
in the grants; and neither he, nor his orantees, 1 nor his or their heirs 
after them, can complain. I want, therefore, no better foundation 
for legislating over the territories than the fact of ownership in the 
United States. Grant this, and all is granted. If I own a farm, or 
a shop, I may, as owner, prescribe the conditions of its transfer to 
another. If he does not like my conditions, then Jet him abandon 
the negotiation ; if he accedes to the conditions, then let him abide 
by them, and hold his peace. 

Sir, in the State to which 1 belong, we hold ‘Temperance to ,be 
a great blessing, as well as a great virtue ; ; and Inteniperance to be 
a ereat curse, as well as a great sin. [ know of incorporated com- 
panies there, who have purchased large tracts of land for manufac- 
turing purposes. ‘T‘hey well know how essential is the sobriety of 
workmen to the profitableness of their work; they know too, how 
wasteful and destructive is inebriety. In disposing of their ‘land, 
therefore, to the men whom they would gather about* them and em- 
ploy, they incorporate the provision. as a fundamental article in the 
deed of grant, that ardent spirits shall never be sold upon the 
premises; and thus they shut up, at once; one of the most densely 
thronged gateways of hell. Have they not a right to do so, from 
the mere fact of ownership? Would any judge or lawyer doubt the 
validity of such a condition; or would any sensible man ever doubt 
its wisdom or humanity ? Pecuniarily and morally, this comes under 
the head of “ needful rules and regulations.” If tipplers do not like 
them, let them stagger away, and seek their residence elsewhere. 

But the United States is not merely a land owner, it is a sove- 
reignty. As such, it exercises all constitutional jurisdiction over 
all its territories. Whence, but from this right of sovereignty, does 
the Government obtain its power of saying that no man shall pur- 
chase land of the natives, or aborigines, and if you wish to buy land 
in the territories, you shall come to the Government for it? Is there 
any express power in the Constitution authorizing Congress to say 

= ; 


6 


to all the citizens of the United States, “If you wish’to buy un- 
granted Jand in the territories, you must come to us, for no one else 
can sell, or shall sell.” This right, sustained by all our legislation 
and adjudications, covers the whole ground.—Lessee of Johnson et 
al. vs. McIntosh, 8 Wheaton, 543; 5 Cond. Re. 515. 

But, leaving the Constitution, it is denied that there are prece- 
dents. ‘ The honorable gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Bayty,) has 
not only contested the power of Congress to legislate on the subject 
of slavery in the territories, but he has denied the existence of pre- 
cedents to sustain this power. Sir, it would have been an assertion 
far less bold, to deny the existence of precedents for the election of 
a President of the United States; for the instances of the latter 
have been far less frequent than of the former. Congress has legis- 
lated on the subject of slavery in the territories all the way up, from 
the adoption of the Constitution to the present time ; and this legis- 
lation has been sustained by the judiciary of both the General and 
State Governments, and carried into execution by the executive 
power of both.—See Menard vs. Aspasia, 5 Peters, 505; Phebe et 
al. vs. Jay, Breese’s Re., 210; Hoge vs. the Zanesville Canal Co., 5 
Ohio Re., 410; Martin’s Louisiana Re., N. S., 699; Spooner- vs. - 
McConnell, 1 McLean’s Re., 341; Harvey vs. Decker, Walker’s 
Mississippi Re., 36; Rachel vs. Walker, 4 Missouri Re., 350. 

So far as the uniform practice of sixty years can settle a doubtful, 
or confirm an admitted right, this power of legislating over the ter- 
ritories has been taken from the region of doubt, and established 
upon the basis of acknowledged authority. In legislating for al! 
that is now Ohio, Indiana, [linois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Mis- 
souri, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Florida, we have legis- 
lated on the subject of slavery in the territories. Sixty years of 
legislation on one side, and not a denial of the rizht on the other. 

But the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Bayxy,) says, that the ac- 
tion of Congress, in regard to the territories, has been rather that of 
constitution-making than of law-making. Suppose this to be true; 
does not the greater include the less? If Congress could make a 
Constitution for all the territories—an organic, fundamental law— 
a law of Jaws—could it not, had it so pleased, make the Jaw itself ? 
A Constitution prescribes to the legislature what it shall do, and 
what it shall not do; it commands, prohibits, and binds men by oaths 
to support itself. It says, “ hitherto shalt thou come, and no farther.” 
And if Congress can do this, can it not make the local law itself? 
Can aught be more preposterous? As if we could command others 
to do what we have no right to do ourselves, and prohibit others 
from doing what lies beyond our own jurisdiction. Surely, to de- 
cree on what subjects a community shall legislate, and on what they 
shall not legislate, is the exercise of the highest power. _ 

But Congress has not stopped with the exercise of the constitu- 
tion-making power. In various forms, and at all times, it has legis- 
lated for the territories, in the strictest sense of the word legislation. 
It has legislated again and again, and ten times again, on this very 
subject of slavery. See the act of 1794, prohibiting the slave trade 


7 


from any “ port or place” in the United States. Could any citizen 
of the United States, under this act, have gone into one of our ter- 
ritories and fitted out vessels for the slave trade ? Surely he could, 
if Congress has no right to legislate over territories only as so much 
land and water. 

By statute 1798, chapter 28, § 7, slaves were forbidden to be 
brought into the Mississippi territory from without the United States ; 
and all slaves so brought in were made free. 

So the act of 1800, chapter 51, in further prohibition of the slave 
trade, applied to all the citizens of the United States, whether living 
in territories or in organized States. Did not this legislation cover 
the territories ? . 

By statute 1804, chapter 38, § 10, three classes of slaves were 
forbidden to be introduced into the Orleans territory. 

Statute 1807, chapter 22, prohibiting the importation of slaves 
after January 1, 1308, prohibited their importation into the territories 
in express terms. 

Statute 1818, chapter 91, statute 1819, chapter 101, and statute 
1820, chapter 113, prohibiting the slave trade, and making it piracy, 
expressly included all the territories of the United States. 

Statute 1819, chapter 21, authorized the President to provide for 
the safe-keeping of slaves imported from Africa, and for their re- 
moval to their home in that land. Under this law, the President 
might have established a depot for slaves within the limits of our 
territories, on the Gulf, or on the Mississippi. 

By statute 1820, chapter 22, § 8, Congress established what has 
been called the Missouri compromise line, thereby expressly legis- 
lating on the subject of slavery. So of Texas. See Jo. Res. March 
1, 1845. 

By statute 1819, chapter 93, statute 1821, chapter 39, § 2, and 
statute 122, chapter 13, § 9. Congress legislated on the subject of 
slavery in the Territory of Florida. 

Does it not seem almost incredible that a defender and champion 
of slavery should deny the power of Congress to legislate on the 
subject of slavery in the territories? If Congress has no such 
power, by what right can a master recapture a fugitive slave-escap- 
ing into a territory? The Constitution says: “No person held to 
service, or labor, in one State, escaping into another,”’—that is, 
another State,—“ shall be discharged from such service, or labor,” 
é&c. The act of 1793, chapter 7, § 3, provides that when a person 
“held to labor,” &c., “shall escape into any other of the said States, 
or territory,” he may be taken. By what other law than this can a 
runaway slave be retaken in a territory? If Congress has no power 
to legislate on the subject of slavery in any territory, then, surely, 
they cannot legislate for the capture of a fugitive slave ina territory. 
The argument cuts both ways. The knife wounds him who would 
use it to wound his fellow. 

Further than this. If slavery is claimed to be one of the common 
subjects of legislation, then any legislation by Congress for the 
territories, on any of the common subjects of legislation, is a pre- 


8 


cedent, going to prove its right to legislate on slavery itself. If 
Congress may legislate on one subject. belonging to a class, then it 
may legislate on any other subject belonging to the same class. 
Now, Cong ress has legislated for the territories on almost the whole 
circle of subjects belonging to common legislation. It has legislated 
on the elective franchise, on the pecuniary qualifications and resi- 
dence of candidates for office, on the militia, on oaths, on the per 
diem and mileage of members, &c., &c. By statute 1811, chapter 
21, § 3, authorizing the ‘Territory of Orleans to form a constitution, 
it was provided, that all legislative proceedings and judicial records 
_ should be kept and promulgated in the English language. Cannot 
Congress make provision for the rights of the people, as well as for 
the Jancuage in which the laws and records defining those rights 
shall be “expressed ? Any language is sweet to the ears of man 
which gives him the right of trial by jury, of habeas corpus, of 
religious freedom, and of life, limb, and liberty; but accursed is 
that language, and fit only for the realms below, which deprives an 
immortal being of the rights of intelligence and of freedom; of 
the right to himself, and the dearer rights of family. 

But all this is by no means the strongest part of the evidence 
with which our statutes and judicial decisions abound, showing the 
power of Congress to legislate over territories. From the begin- 
ning, Congress has not only legislated over the territories, but it “has 
appointed ‘and controlled the agents of legislation. 

The general structure of the legislature in several of the earlier 
territorial governments was this: It consisted of a governor and 
of two houses—an upper anda lower. Without an exception, where 
a governor has heen appointed, Congress has always reserved his 
appointment to itself, or to the President. ‘The governor so appointed 
has always had a veto power over the two houses ; and Congress 
has always reserved to itself, or to the President, a veto power, not 
only over him but over him and both the houses besides. Con- 
gress has often interfered also with the appointment of the upper 
house, leaving only the lower house to be chosen exclusively by the 
people of the territory; and it has determined even for the lower 
house the qualifications both of electors and of elected. Further 
still: The power of removing the governor, at pleasure, has always 
been reserved to Congress, or to the President. 

Look at this: Congress determines for the territory the qualifica- 
tions of electors and clected—at least in the first instance. No law 
of the territorial legislature is valid until approved by the governor. 
Though approved by the governor, it may annulled by Congress, or 
by the President; and the governor is appointed, and may be remoy- 
ed, at pleasure, by Congress, or by the President. 

To be more specific, I cive the following outline of some of the 
territorial governments: 

Ohio Territory, statute 1789, chapter 8—A governor for four 
years, nominated by the President, approved by “the Senate, with 
power to appoint all subordinate civil and military officers. 

A secretary for four years, appointed in the same way. 


9 


Three judges, to hold office during good behavior. Governor 
and judges the sole legislature, until the district shall contain 5,000 
free male inhabitants. Then, 

» A house of assembly, chosen by qualified electors, for two years. 

A legislative council of five, to hold office for five years. The 
house of assembly to choose ten men; five of whom are to be 
selected by the President and approved by the Senate. These five 
to be the “ legislative council.” 

A governor, as before, with an unconditional veto, and a right to. 
convene, prorogue, and dissolve the assembly. 

Power given to the President to revoke the commissions of 
governor and secretary. 

Indiana Territory, statute 1800, chapter 41.—Similar to that of 
Ohio. At first the lower house to consist of not more than nine nor 
less than seven. 

Mississippi Territory, statute 1800, chapter 50.—Similar to that 
of Indiana. 

Michigan Territory, statute 1805, chapter 5.—Similar to that of 
Indiana. 

Illinois Territory, statute 1809, chapter 13.—Similar to that of 
Indiana. 

Alabama Territory, statute 1817, chapter 59.—Similar to that of 
Mississippi. 

Wisconsin Territory, statute 1886, chapter 54.—Governor for 
three years, appointed as above, and removable by the President, 
with power to appoint officers and grant pardons. Unconditional veto. 

Secretary for four years, removable by the President. In the 
absence, or during the inability, of the governor, to perform his duties. 

Legislative assembly to consist of a council and a house of rep- 
resentatives. to be chosen for two years. Congress to have an 
unconditional veto, to be exercised on Jaws approved by the governor.. 

Louisiana Territory, statute 1803, chapter 1.—Sole dictatorial 
power given to the President of the United States; and>the army 
and navy of the United States placed at his command to govern the 
territorial inhabitants.—(This was under Mr. Jefferson.) 

Territory of Orleans, statute 1804, chapter 38.—Governor nomi- 
nated by President, approved by Senate, tenure of office three years. 
Removable by the President. Secretary for four years, to be gover- 
nor in case, &c. 

Legislative council of thirteen, to be annually appointed by the 
President. 

Governor and council, of course, a reciprocal negative on each 
other. Congress an unconditional veto on both. 

District of Louisiana, statute 1804, chapter 38.—To be governed 
by the governor and judges of the Territory of Indiana. 

Congress an unconditional veto on all their laws. 

Missouri Territory, statute 1812, chapter 95.—A governor, ap- 
pointable and removable as above. 

Secretary, the same. 

A legislative council of nine, eighteen persons to be nominated 


10 


by the house of representatives for the Territory ; nine of these to 
be selected and appointed by the President and Senate. A house 
of representatives te be chosen by the people. 

Arkansas Territory, statute 1819, chapter 49.—A gevernee and 
secretary, appointable and removable as above. 

All legislative power vested in the governor and in the judges of 
the superior court. 

When a majority of the freeholders should elect, then they might 
adopt the form of government of Missouri. 

East and West “Florida; statute 1819, chapter 93.—Statute 1821, 
chapter 29.—Statute 1829, chapter 13.—From March 3, 1839, to 
March 30, 1822, the government vested solely im the President of 
the U. States, and to be exercised by such officers as he should appoint. 

After March 30, 1822, a governor and secretary appointable and 
removable as above. 

All legislative power vested in the governor, and in thirteen 
persons, called a legislative council, to be appointed annually by the 
President. 

Yet, Sir, notwithstanding all this legislation of Congress for the 
Territories, on the subject of slavery itself; notwithstanding its 
legislation on a great class of subjects of which slaver y is acknowl- 
edged to be one; notwithstanding its appointment, in some cases, 
of ‘the legislative power of the Terri itory ; making its own agent— 
the gover rnor—removable at pleasure; giving him a veto in the first 
place, and reserving to itself a veto when he has approved ; not- 
withstanding the exercise, in other cases, of full, absolute sovereignty 
over the inhabitants of the Territories, and all their interests; and 
notwithstanding such has been the practice of the Government for 
sixty years, under Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson and others, 
itis now denied that Congress has any right to legislate on the 
subject of slavery in the Territories. Sir, with a class of politicians 
in this country, it has come to this that slavery is the only sacred 
thing in existence. It is self-existent like a god, and human power 
cannot prevent it. From year to year it goes on conquering and to 
conquer, and human power cannot dethrone it. 

Sir, I will present another argument on the subject, and I do not 
see how any jurist or statesman can invalidate it. 

Government is one, but its functions are several. They are leg- 
islative, judicial, executive. These functions are co-ordinate. 
Each supposes the other two. ‘There must be a legislature to enact | 
laws. There must be a judiciary to expound the laws enacted, and 
point out the individuals against whom they are to be enforced. 
There must be an executive arm to enforce the decisions of the 
courts. In every theory of government, where one of these exists, 
the others exist. Under our Constitution, they are divided into 
three parts, and apportioned among three co-ordinate bodies. 
Whoever denies one of these must deny them all. 

If the Government of the United States, therefore, has no right 
to legislate for the ‘Territories, it has no right to adjudicate for the 
Territories; if it has no right to adjudicate, then it has no right to 


il 


exiforce the decisions of the judicial tribunals. These rights must 
stand or fall together. He who takes frem this Govermentthe law-mak- 
ing pewer, in regard to Territories, strikes also the balances of justice 
from the hands of the judge, and the mace of authority from those 
ef the executive. There is no escape from this conclusion, The 
Constitution gives ao more authority to adjude suits in the Territo- 
ries, er to execute the decisions of the territorial courts, than it 
does to legislate. If Congress has no power over territory, only 
as land, then what does this land want ef judges and -marshals? 
Is it not obvious, then, that this new reading of the Constitution 
sets aside the whole legislative, judicial, and executive administra- 
tion of this Gevernment over Territories, since the adoption of the 
Constitution? Itmakes the whole of it invalid. The Presidents, 
all members of Cengress, all judges upon the bench, have been m 
a dream for the last sixty years; and are now waked up and recalled 
te their senses by the charm of a newly discovered reading of the 
Censtitution. 

Hitkerto, sir, I have net directed my remarks to the actual legis- 
Jation by Congress on the subject of slayery in the Northwestern 
Territory, so called. That Territory was consecrated to freedom by 
the erdinance of 1787. it was said that the Confederation had ne 
pewer to pass such an ordinance. One answer to this is, that the 
erdiaance was a “compact,” in terms, and so was adopted and rati- 
fied by the 6th article of the Constitution, under thesterm “ engage- 
ment.” 

Bet whatever may be thought of this answer, there is another one 
which is conclusive. Congress has ratified the ordinance again and 
again; the first Congress at its first session passed an act, whose 
preamble is as follows: “Whereas in order that the ordinance of the 
United States, in Congress assembled, for the government of the ter- 
ritory northwest of the river Ohio, may continue to have full effect,” 
&c. Ii then preceeds to medify seme parts of the erdinance, and to 
adopt all the rest.* 

In the 2d section of the act of 1800, chapter 41, establishing the 
Indiana Territory, it is expressly provided that its government shall be 
“in all respects similar to that provided by the ordinance of 1787.” 

In the act of 1802, chapter 40, seetion 5, authorizing Ohio to form 
a constitution and State government, this ordinance of 1787, is three 
times referred to as a valid and existing agreement; and it has 
always been held te be so by the courts of Ohio. 

So in the act of 1816, chapter 57, section 4, authorizing the erec- 
tion of Indiana into a State, the ordinance is again recognized, and 
is made a part of the fundamental law of tke State. 

So in the act of 1818, chapter 67, section 4, authorizing Hlinois 
to become a State. 

So in the act of 1805, chapter 5, section 2, establishing the Ter- 
ritery of Michigan. 

* Mr. Madison thought the original ordinance to be clearly invalid. See 


Federalist, No. 38. It is just as clear that he thought the Constitution gave 
validity to it. See Federalist, No. 43. : 


12 

So of Wisconsin ; see act of 1847, chapter 53, in connection with 
the constitution of Wisconsin. 

But all this is tedious and superfluous. I have gone into this de- 
tail, because I understand the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Baytxy,) 
to have denied this adoption, and these recognitions of the ordinance. 
I hazard nothing in saying that the ordinance of 1787 has been ex- 
pressly referred to as valid, or expressly or impliedly re-enacted a 
dozen times by the Congress of the United States; and, in the State 
courts of Ohio, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Missouri, it has 
been adjudged to be constitutional. How, then, is it possible for 
any mind amenable to legal rules for the decision of legal questions, 
to say that Congress cannot legislate, or has not legislated, (except 
once or twice inadvertently,) on the subject of slavery in the Ter- 
ritories. 

On this part of the argument, I have only a concluding remark to 
submit. ‘The position I am contesting affirms generally that Con- 
gress cannot legislate on the subject of slavery in the Territories. 
The inexpediency of so legislating is further advocated, on the 
ground that it is repugnant to Democratica] principles to debar the 
inhabitants of the Territories from governing themselves. Must the’ 
free men of the Territories, it is asked, have laws made for them by 
others? No! It is anti-democratic, monarchical, intolerable. All 
men have the right of self-government ; and this principle holds true 
with regard to the inhabitants of ‘Territories, as well as the inhabi- 
tants of States. 

Now, if these declarations were a sincere and honest affirmation 
of human rights, I should respect them and honor their authors. 
Did this doctrine grow out of a jealousy for the rights of man, a 
fear of usurpation, an assertion of the principle of self-government, 
I should sympathize with it, while I denied its legality. But, sir, it 
is the most painful aspect of this whole case, that the very object 
and purpose of claiming these ample and sovereign rights for the 
inhabitants of the Territories, is that they may deny all rights to a 
portion of their fellow-beings within them. Enlarge, aggrandize 
the rights of the territorial settlers! And why? That they may 
abolish all rights for a whole class of human beings. This claim, 
then, is not made for the purpose of making freemen more free, but 
for making slaves more enslaved. ‘The reason for denying to 
Congress the power to legislate for the Territories, is the fear that 
Congress will prevent slavery in them. The reason for claiming 
the supreme right of legislation for the territorial inhabitants, is the 
hope that they will establish slavery within their borders. Must 
not that Democracy be false, which begets slavery as its natural 
offspring ? : 

If it has now been demonstrated that Congress has uniformly 
legislated, and can legislate, on the subject of slavery in the Terri- 
tories, I proceed to consider the next question. Is it expedient to 
exclude slavery from them ? 

Here, on the threshold, we are confronted with the claim that the 
gates shali be thrown wide open tothe admission of slavery into the 


. AS 


broad Western world; because, otherwise, the Southern or slave 
States would be debared from enjoying their share of the common 
property of the Union. 

I meet this claim with a counter-claim. If, on the one hand, the 
consecration of this soil to’ freedom will exclude the slaveholders 
of the South ; it is just as true, on the other hand, that the desecra- 
tion of it to slavery will exclude the free men of the North. We, 
at the North, know too well the foundations of worldly prosperity 
and happiness; we know too well the sources of social and moral 
welfare, ever voluntarily to blend our fortunes with those of a 
community where slavery is tolerated. If our demand for free 
territory, then, excludes them, their demand for slave territory 
excludes us. Not one in five hundred of the freeman of the North 
could ever be induced to take his family and domicil himself ina 
territory where slavery exists. They know that the institution 
would impoverish their estate, demoralize their children, and harrow 
their own consciences with an ever present sence of guilt, until 
those consciences, by force of habit and induration, should pass into 
that callous and moré deplorable state, where continuous crime could 
be committed without the feeling of remorse. 

Sir, let me read a passage from Dr. Channing, written in 1798— 
fifty years ago—when, at the early age of nineteen, he lived for 
some time in Richmond, Va., as a tutor in a private family. While 
there, he wrote a letter, of which the following is an extract: 

“There is one object here which always depresses me. It is 
slavery. ‘This alone would prevent me from ever settling in Virginia. 
Language cannot express my detestation of it. Master and slaves! 
Nature never made such a distinction or established such a relation. 
Man, when forced to substitute the will of another for his own, 
ceases to be a moral agent; his title to the name of man is ex- 

tinguished; he becomes a mere machine in the hands of his 

oppressor. No empire is so valuable as'the empire of one’s self. 
No right is so inseparable from humanity, and so necesssary to the 
improvement of our species, as the right of exerting the powers 
which nature has given us in the pursuit of any and of every good 
which we can obtain without doing injury to others. Should you 
desire it, I will give you some idea of the situation and character of 
the negroes of Virginia. It is a subject so degrading to humanity, 
that I cannot dwell on it with pleasure. I should be obliged to 
show you every vice, heightened by every meanness, and added to 
every misery. The influence of slavery on the whites i is almost as 
fatal as on the blacks themselves.” 

This letter was written fifty years ago, by a young man from New 
England, only nineteen years old. I know that, on all subjects of 
philanthropy and ethics, Dr. Channing was half a century in advance 
of his age. But the sentiments he expressed on this subject, at the 
close of the last century, are now the prevalent, deep-seated feelings 
of Northern men, excepting, perhaps, a few cases, where these: 
feelings have been corrupted by interest. 


14 


I repeat, then, that the North cannot shut out the South from the 
new territories by a law for excluding slavery, more effectually than 
the South will shut out the North by the fat of introducing slavery. 
Even admitting, then, that the law is equal for both North and 
South, I will show that all the equity is on the side of the North. 

Sir, from the establishment of our independence by the treaty of 
1783, to the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and for years 
afterwards, no trace is to be found of an intention to enlarge the 
bounds of our Republic; and it is well known thit the treaty of 
1803, for acquiring Louisiana, was acknowledged by Mr. Jefferson, 
who made it, to be unconstitutional. In 1787, the Magna Charta 
of perpetual freedom was secured to the Northwest territory. But 
the article excluding slavery from it had an earlier date than ’87. 
On the Ist of March, 1784, Congress voted to accept a cession 
from the State of Virginia of her claim to tbe territory northwest 
of the Ohio river. The subject of providing a government for this 
and other territory was referred to a committee, consisting of Mr. 
Jefferson, Mr. Chase of Maryland,and Mr. Howell of Rhode Island. 
On the 19th of April, 1784, their report was considered. ‘That 
report contained the following ever-memorable clause: “That - 
after the year 1800, of the Christian era, there shall be neither 
slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said States, [they 
were spoken of as States, because, it was always contemplated to 
erect the territories into States,| otherwise than in punishment of 
crimes whereof the party shall have been convicted to have been 
personally guilty.” 

Sir, we hear much said in our day of the Wilmot proviso against 
slavery. In former years, great credit has been given to Mr. Nathan 
Dane, of Massachusetts, for originating the 6th article (against 
slavery,)in the ordinance of 1787, Sir, it is a misnomer to call 
this restrictive clause the ‘ Wilmot proviso.” Itis the Jefferson 
proviso, and Mr. Jefferson should have the honor of it; and would 
to Heaven that our Southern friends, who kneel so devoutly at his 
shrine, could be animated by that lofty spirit of freedom, that love 
for the rights of man, which alone can make the -place of their 
devotion sacred. 

But what is most material to be observed here, is, that the plan 
of government reported by Mr. Jefferson, and acted upon by the 
Congress at that time, embraced all the “ Western territory ;” it 
embraced al} the “territory ceded or to be ceded, by individual 
“States to the United States.” See Journals of Congress, April 23, 
1784. If, then, we leave out Kentucky and Tennessee, as being 
parts of Virginia and North Carolina, all the residue of the territo- 
ry North or South of the Ohio river, within the treaty limits of the 
United States, was intended, by the Jefferson proviso, to be rescued 
from the doom of slavery.. For that proviso, there were sixteen 
votes, and only seven against it. Yet so singularly were these 
seven votes distributed, and so large a majority of the States did 
it require to pass an act, that it was lost. ~The whole of the rep- 
resentation from seven States voted for it unanimously. Only two 


15 


States voted unanimously against it. Had but one of Mr. Jefferson’s 
colleagues voted with him, and had Mr. Spaight, of North Carolina, 
voted for it, (only nine out of twenty-three,) the restrictive clause in 
the report would have stood. But a minority of seven from the 
slaveholding States controlled a majority of sixteen from the free 
States,—ominous even at that early day of a fate that has now 
relentlessly pursued us for sixty years. 

That vote was certainly no more than a fair representation of the 
feeling of the country against slavery, at that time. It was with 
such a feeling that the “compromises of the Constitution,” as they 
are called, were entered into. Nobody dreaded or dreamed of the 
extension of slavery beyond its then existing limits. Yet behold 
its aggressive march. Besides Kentucky and Tennessee, which I 
omit for reasons before intimated, seven new slave States have been 
added to the Union—Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Arkansas, 
Louisiana, Florida, and Texas—the last five out of territory not 
belonging to us at the adoption of the Constitution ; while only one 
free State, lowa, has been added during all this time, out of such 
newly acquired territory.* 

But there is another fact, which shows that the slaveholders have 
already had their fall share of territory, however wide the bounda- 
ries of this country may hereafter become. 

I have seen the number of actual slaveholders variously estimat- 
ed; but the highest estimate I have ever seen is three hundred 
thousand. Allowing six persons to a family, this number would re- 
present a white population of eighteen hundred thousand. 

Mr. Gayur, of Alabama, interrupted and said: If the gentleman 
from Massuchusetts. has been informed that the number of slave- 
Pc is only 800,000, then I will tell him his information is utterly 
aise. 

Mr. Manx. Will the gentleman tell me how many there are ? 

Mr, Gayte. ‘Ten times as many. 

Mr. Mann. Tentimes asmany! Ten times 300,000 is 3,000,000 ; 
and allowing six persons to each family, this would giv® a population 
of 18,000,000 directly connected with slaveholding ; while the whole 


* Here Mr. Hitcrarp, of Alabama,'rose to ask if the South, by the Mis- 
sonri compromise, had not surrendered its right to carry slavery north of the 
compromise line? The question was not understood. — If it had-been, it 
would have been replied, that the existence of slavery at New Orleans, and 
a few other places in Louisiana, at the time of the treaty with France, by no 
means established the right to carry it to the Pacific Ocean. if the treaty ex- 
tended so far. peri! being against natural right, can only exist by virtue 
of positive law, backed by force sufficient to protect it. It could not law. 
fully exist, therefore, in any part of Louisiana, which had not been laid out, 
organized, and subjected to the civil jurisdiction of the Government. Suc h 
Was not the case with any part of the territory north of the compromise 
line; and therefore nothing was surrendered. On the other hand. in the for- 
mation of the territorial governments of Orleans, Missouri, Arkansas, and 
Florida, a vast extent of country was surrendered to slivery. And this is 
independent of the question, whether Congress, by the Constitution, has any - 
more right to establish slavery any where, than it has to establish an inqui- 
sition, create an order of nobility, or anoint a king. 


16 


free population of the South, in 1840, was considerably less thar 
five millions. | 

Mr. Meape, of Virginia, here interposed and said, that, where 
father or mother owned slaves, they were considered the joint prop- 
erty of the family. I think, if you include the grown and the young, 
there are about 3,000,000 interested im slave preperty. 

Mr. Mann resumed. My data lead me to believe that the number 
does not now exceed two miliions; but, at the time of the adoption 
of the Constitution, the number directly connected with slaveholding 
must have been Jess than one million, | Yet this one million has al- 
ready managed to acquire the broad States of Missouri, Arkansas, 
Louisiana, Florida, and Texas, beyond the limits of the treaty of 
1783; when, at the time the “compromises of the Constitution” 
were entered into, not one of the parties supposed that we should 
ever acquire territory beyond those limits. And this has been done 
for the benefit (if it be a benefit,) of that one million of slaveholders, 
against what is now a free population of fifteen millions. And, in 
addition to this, it is to be considered that the non-slaveholding pop- 
ulation of the slave States have as direct and deep an interest as 
any part of the country, adverse to the extension of slayery. If all 
our new territory be doomed to slavery, where can the non-slave- 
holders of the slaveholding States emigrate to? Are they not to be 
considered? Has one half the population of the slayeholding States 
rights, which are paramount, not only. to the rights of the other half, 
but to the rights of all the free States besides, for such is the claim ? 
No, sir. I say that, if slavery were no moral or political evil, yet, 
according to all principles of justice and equity, the slaveholders 
have already obtained their full share of territory, though all the 
residue of this continent were annexed to the Union, and we were 
to hecome, in the insane language of the day, “an ocean-bound 
Republic.” . 

I now proceed to consider the nature and effects of slavery, as a 
reason why new-born communities should be exempted from Ht, 
First, let me treat ef its economical or financial, and secondly, of 
its mora! aspects. 

Though slaves are said to be property, they are the preventers, 
the wasters, the antagonists, of property. So far from facilitating 
the increase of individual or national wealth, slavery retards both, 
It blasts woridly prosperity. Other things being equal, a free peo- 
ple will thrive and prosper, in a mere worldly sense, more than a 
people divided into masters and slaves. Were we so constituted as 
to care for nothing, to aspire to nothing, beyond mere temporal well.* 
being, this well-being would counsel us to abolish slavery wherever 
it exists, and to repel its approach wherever it threatens. 

Enslave a man, and you destroy his ambition, his enterprise, his 
capacity. In the constitution of human nature, the desire of better~ 
ing one’s condition, is the main-spring of effort. The first touch of 
slavery snaps this spring. The slave does not participate in the 
value of the wealth he creates. All he earns, another seizes. <A 
free man-labors,-not only to improve his own candition, but ta better 


17 


the condition of his children. ‘The mighty impulse of parental af- 
fection repays for diligence, and makes exertion sweet. The slaye’s 
heart never beats with this high emotion. However industrious and 
frugal he may be, he has nothing to bequeath to his children—or 
nothing save the sad bonds he himself bas worn. Fear may make 
him work, but hope never. When he moves his tardy limbs, it is 
because of the suffering that goads him from behind, and not from 
the bright prospects that beckon him forward in the race. 

What would a slave owner at the South think, should he come to 
Massachusetts, and there see a farmer seize upon his hired man, call 
in a surgeon, and cut off all the flexor muscles of his arms and legs ? 
I do not ask what he would think of his humanity, but what would 
he think of his sanity? Yet the planter does more than this when 
he makes a man a slave. He cuts deeper than the muscles; he 
destroys the spirit that moves the muscles. 

In all ages of the world, among all nations, wherever the earn- 
ings of the laborer have been stolen away from him, his energies 
have gone with his earnings. Under the villeinage system of Eng- 
land, the villeins were a low, idje, spiritless race ; dead to responsi- 
bility ; groveliing in their desires ; resistant of labor; without enter- 
prise ; without foresight. This principle is now exemplified in the 
landlord and tenant system of Ireland. If a tenant is to be no bet- 
ter off for the improvements he makes on an estate, he will not 
make the improvements. Look at the seigniories of New York— 
the anti-rent districts as they are now called—every man acquainted 
with the subject knows that both people and husbandry are half a 
century behind the condition of contiguous fee-simple proprietor- 
ships. All history illustrates the principle, that when property is 
insecure, it will not be earned. If a despot can seize and confiscate 
the property of his subject at pleasure, the subject will not acquire 
property, and thereby give to himself the conspicuousness that in- 
vites the plunder. And if this be so when property is merely inse- 
cure, what must be the effect when a man has no property whatever 
in his earnings? Who does not know that a slave, who can ration- 
ally hope to purchase his freedom, will do all the work he ever did 
before, and earn his freedom money besides? Slavery, therefore, 
though claiming to be a kind of property, is the bane of property ; and 
the more slaves there are found inthe inventory of a nation’s wealth, 
the less in value will the aggregate of that inventory be. 

This is one of the reasons why slave labor is so much less effi- 
. cient than free labor. The former can never compete with the lat- 
ter; and, while the greater service is performed with cheerfulness, 
the smaller is extorted by fear. Just as certain as that the locomotive 
can outrun the horse, and the lightning ontspeed the locomotive, just 
so certain is it that he who is animated by the hopes and the rewards 
of freedom, will outstrip the disheartened and fear driven slave, 

The intelligent freeman can afford to live well, dress decently, 
and occupy a comfortable tenement. A scanty subsistence, a squalid 
garb, a mean and dilapidated hovel, proclaim the degradation of the 
slave. The slave States gain millions of dollars every year from 


O* 


18 


the privations, the mean food, clothing, and shelter, to which the 
slaves are subjected ; and yet they grow rich less rapidly than States 
where millions of dollars are annually expended for the comforts 
and conveniences of the laborer. More is lost in production than 
4s gained by privation. 

A universal concomitant of slavery is, that it makes white labor 
disreputable. Being disreputable, it is shunned. The pecuniary 
loss resulting from this is incalculable. Dry up the myriad head- 
springs of the Mississippi, and where would be the mighty volume 
of waters which now bear navies on their bosom, and lift the ocean 
itself above its level, by their ont-pouringe flood? Abolish these 
sources of wealth, which consist in the personal industry of every 
man, and of each member of his family, and that wide-spread 
thrift and competence and elegance, which are both the reward and 
the stimulus of labor, will be abolished with them. Forego the 
means, and you forfeit the end. _ You must use the instrument, if 
you would have the product. Nothing but the feeling of independ- 
ence, the conscious security of working for one’s self, and one’s 
family, will, in the present state of the world, make labor profitable. 

I know it has been recently said, in this Capitol, and by high au- 
thority, that, with the exception of menial services, it is not disrepu- 
table at the South, for a white man to labor. There are two ways, 
each independent of the other, to disprove this assertion. One of 
them consists in the testimony of a host of intelligent witnesses ac- 
quainted with the condition of things at the South. L might quote 
page after page from various sources; but, as the assertion comes 
froma gentleman belonging to South Carolina, I will meet it with 
the statements of another gentleman belonging to the same State. 
I refer to Mr. William Gregg, of Charleston, a gentleman who is 
ex‘ensively acquainted with the social condition of men both North 
and South. 

In that State, according to the last census, there were about 
150,000 free whites, over twelve years of age. “Of this class,” 
says Mr. Gregg, “fifty thousand are non-producers.”* | suppose 
South Carolina to be as thrifty a slave State as there is, perhaps ex- 
cepting Georgia. Yet here is one-third part of the population, old 
enough to work and able to work, who are idle—and of course vic- 
jous ; non-pioducers, but the worst kind of consumers. 

Another answer to the above assertion is, that if white labor were 
reputable at the South, and white men were industrisus, the whole 
country would be a garden, a terrestrial paradise, so far as neatness, 
abundance, and beauty are concerned. Where are the results of 
this respected and honored white labor? In a country where few 
expenses are necessary to ward off the rigors of winter; where the . 
richest staples of the world are produced; where cattle and flocks 
need but little shelter, if any ; if man superadded his industry to the 
bounties of nature, want would be wholly unknown; competence 


* Essays on Domestic Industry, or an Inquiry into the expedieney of es- 
tablishing Cotton Manufactories in South Carolina, 1845. 


19 


would give place to opulence, and the highest decorations of art 
would mingle with the glowing beauties of nature. But hear Mr. 
Gregg :— 

‘My recent visit to the northern States has fully satisfied me 
that the true secret of our difficulties lies in the want of energy on 
the part of our capitalists, and ignorance and laziness on the part of 
those who ought to labor. We need never look for thrift while we 
permit our immense timber forests, granite quarries, ¢ and mines to lie 
idle, and supply ourselves with the hewn granite, pine boards, laths, 
shingles, &c., furnished by the lazy dogs of the North; ah, worse 
than this ; we see our back country farmers, many of whom are too 
lazy to mend a broken gate, or repair the fences to protect their 
crops from the neighboring stock, actually supplied with their axe, 
hoe, and broom handles, pitch forks, rakes, &c., by the wndolent 
mountaineers of New Hampshire and Massachusetts. The time 
was, when every old woman had her gourd, from which the country 
gardens were supplied with seed. We now find it more convenient 
to permit this duty to devolve on our careful friends, the Yankees. 
Even our boat-oars and hand-spikes for rolling logs, are furnished, 
ready made, to our hand,” &c. “Need I add, to further exemplify 
our excessive indolence, that the Charleston market is supplied with 
fish and wild game by northern men, who come out here as regular- 
ly as the winter comes, for this purpose, and from our own waters 
and forests often realise, in the course of one winter, a sufficiency 
to purchase a small farm in New Eneland.” Essays, page 8. 

Again: “It is only necessary to travel over the sterile mountains 
of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont and New Hampshire, to 
learn the true secret of our difficulties,” — “to learn the differ- 
ence between indolence and industry, extravagance and economy. 
We there see the scenery, which would take the place of our un- 
painted mansions, dilapidated cabins, with mud chimneys, and no 
windows, broken down rail fences, fields overgrown with weeds, 
and thrown away half exhausted, to be taken up by pine thickets ; 
beef cattle unprotected from the inclemency of winter, and so poor 
as barely to preserve life.” Essays, page 7. 

And again: ‘Shall we pass unnoticed the thousands of poor, ig- 
norant, degraded white people among us, who, in this land of plenty, 
live in comparative nakedness and starvation ?- Many a one is rear- 
ed in proud South Carolina, from birth to manhood, who has never 
passed a month in which he has not, some part of the time, been 
stinted for meat. Many a mother is there who will tell you that her 
children are but scantily supplied with bread, and much more scan- 
tily with meat, and if they be clad with comfortable raiment, it is at 
the expense of these scanty allowances of food. These may be 
startling statements, but they are nevertheless true; and, if not be- 
lieved in Charleston, the members of our legislature, who have trav- 
ersed the State in electioneering campaigns, can attest their truth.” 
Essays, page 22. 

After such statements as these; after the testimony of hundreds 
and hundreds of eye witnesses; after the proofs furnished by the 


20 


agoregates of products, published in our Patent Office reports, it is 
drawing a little too heavily on our credulity to say that the white 
man at the South is industrious. Industry proves itself by its re- 
sults, as the sun proves itself by shining. 

But slavery is hostile to the pecuniary advancement of the com- 
munity in another way. The slave must be kept in ignorance. He 
must not be educated, lest with education should come a knowledge 
of his natural rights, and the means of escape or the power of ven- 
geance. ‘T’o secure the abolition of his freedom, the growth of his 
mind must be abolished. His education, therefore, is prohibited by 
statute, under terrible penalties. 

Now a man is weak in his muscles; he is strong only in his fac- 
ulties. In physical strength, how much superior is an ox or a horse 
to a man; in fleetness, the dromedary or the eagle. It is through 
mental strength only that man becoines the superior and governor 
of all animals. 

But it was not the design of Providence that the work of the 
world should be performed by muscular strength. God has filled 
the earth and imbued the elements with energies of greater power 
than all the inhabitants of a thousand planets like ours. Whence 
come our necessaries and our luxuries? those comforts and appli- 
ances that make the difference between a houseless wandering tribe 
of Indians in the far West, and a New England village ? They do 
not come wholly or principally from the original, unassisted strength 
of the human arm, but from the employment, through intelligence 
and skill, of those great natural forces, with which the bountiful . 
Creator has filled every part of the material universe. Caloric, 
gravitation, expansibility, compressibility, electricity, chemical affin- 
ities and repulsions, spontaneous yelocities—these are the mighty 
agents which the intellect of man harnesses to the car of improve- 
ment. ‘The application of water and wind and steam to the propul- 
sion of machinery, and to the transportation of men and merchan- 
dise from place to place, has added ten thousand fold to the actual 
products of human industry. flow small the wheel which the 
stoutest laborer can turn, and how soon will he be weary. Compare 
this with a wheel driving a thousand spindles or looms, which a 
stream of water can turn,and never tire. A locomotive will take 
five hundred men, and bear them on their journey hundreds of miles 
inaday. Look at these same five hundred men, starting from the 
same point, and attempting the same distance, with all the pedes- 
trian’s, or the equestrian’s toi] and tardiness. ‘The eotton mills of 
Massachusetts will turn out more cloth in one day than could have 
been manufactured by all the inhabitants of the Eastern continent 
during the tenth century. On an element which in ancient times 
was supposed to be exclusively within the contro] of the gods, and 
where it was deemed impious for human power to intrude, even 
there the cigantic forces of nature, which human science and skill 
have enlisted in their service, confront and overcome the raging of 
the elements—breasting teinpests and tides, escaping reefs and lee- 
shores, and .careering triumphant around the globe, The velocity 


21 


of winds, the weight of waters, and the rage of steam, are powers, 

_ each one of which is infinitely stronger than all the strength of all 
the nations and races of mankind, were it all gathered into a single 
arm. And all these energies are given us on one condition—the 
condition of intelligence—that is, ofseducation. 

Had God intended tha! the work of the world should be done by 
_ human bones and sinews, He would have given us anarm as solid and 
strong as the shaft of a- ‘steam engine ; and enabled us to stand, day 
and night, and turn the crank of -a steamship while sailing to Liver- 
pool or Calcutta. Had God designed the human muscles to do the 
work of the world, then, instead of the ingredients of gun powder 
or gun cotton, and the expansive force of heat, he would rhave given 
us hands which could take a granite quarry and break its solid acres 
into suitable and symmetrical blocks, as easily as we now open an 
orange. Had He intendad us for bearing burdens, He would have 
given us Atlantean shouldérs, by which we could carry the vast 
freights of rail-car and steamship, as a porter carries his pack. He 
would have given us lungs by which we could blow fleets before us ; 
and wings to sweep over ocean wastes. But instead of iron arms, 
and Atlantean shoulders, and the lungs of Boreas, He has given us 
a mind, a soul, a capacity of acquiring knowledge, and thus of ap- 
propriating al] these energies of nature to our own use. Instead of 
a telescopic and microscopic eye, He has given us power to invent 
the telescope and the microscope. Instead of ten thousand fingers, 
He has given us genius inventive of the power loom and the printing 
press. Without a cultivated intellect, man is among the weakest of 
all the dynamical forces of nature; with a cultivated intellect, he 
cammands them all. 

And now, what does the slave-maker do? He abolishes this 
mighty power of the intellect, and uses only the weak, degraded, 
half-animated forces of the human limbs, A thousand slaves may 
stand by a river, and to them it is only an object of fear or of su- 
perstition, An intelligent man surpasses the ancient idea of a rivers 
god; he stands by the. Penobscot, the Kennebec, the Merrimack, or 
the Connecticut ; he commands each to do more work than could be 
performed by a hundred thousand men—to saw timber, to make cloth, 
to grind corn—and they obey. Ignorant slaves stand upon a coal 
mine, and to them it is only a worthless part of the inanimate earth, 
An intelligent man uses the same mine to print a million of books, 
Slaves will seek to obtain the same crop from the same field, year 
after year, though the pabulum of that crop is exhausted; the intel- 
ligent man, with his chemist’s eye, sees not‘only the minutest atoms 
of the earth, but the imponderable gases that permeate it, and he is 
rewarded with a luxuriant harvest. 

Nor are these advantages confined to those departments of nature 
where her mightiest forces are brought into requisition. In accome 
plishing whatever requires delicacy and precision, nature is as much 
more perfect than man, as she is more powerful in whatever requires 
strength, Whether in great or in small operations, all the improve- 
ments in the mechanical and the useful arts come as directly from 





22 


intelligence, as a bird comes out of a shell, or the beautiful colors 
of a flower out of sunshine. The slave-worker is forever prying at 
the short end of Nature’s lever; and using the back, instead of the 
edge, of her finest instruments. 

Sir, the most abundant proof exists, derived rom all departments 
of human industry, that uneducated labor is comparatively unprofit- 
able labor. I have before me the statements of a number of the 
most intelligent gentlemen in Massachusetts, affirming this fact as 
the result of an experience extending over many years. In Massa- 
chusetts we have no native-born child wholly without school instruc- 
tion; but the degrees of attainment, of mental development, are 
various. Talf a dozen years ago, the Massachusetts Board of Edu- 
cation obtained statements from large numbers of our master manu- 
facturers, authenticated from the books of their respective estab- 
lishments, and covering a series of years,.the result of which was, 
that increased wages were found in connection with increased intel- 
ligence, just as certainly as increased heat raises the mercury in the 
thermometer. Foreigners, and those coming from other States who 
made their marks when they receipted their bills, earned the least ; 
those who had a moderate or limited education, occupied a middle 
ground on the pay-roll; while the intelligent young women who 
worked in the mills in winter, and taught schools in summer, crown- 
ed the list. The larger capital in the “form of intelligence yielded 
the larger interest in tbe form of wages. This inquiry was not con- 
fined to manufactures, but was extended to other departments of 
business, where the results of labor could be made the subject of 
exact measurement. 

This is universally so. 'The mechanic sees it, whan he enmpares 
the work of a stupid with that of an awakened mind. ‘The traveller 
sees it, when he passes from an educated into an uneducated nation. 
Sir, there are countries in Europe, lying side by side, where, with- 
out compass or chart, without bound or land-marks, I could run the 
line of demarcation between the two, by the broad, legible charac- 
ters which ignorance has written on roads, fields, houses, and the 
persons of men, women, and children on one side, and which knowl- 
edge has inscribed on the other. 

This difference is most striking in the mechanic arts; but it is 
clearly visible also in husbandry, Not the most fertile soil, not 
mines of silver and gold, can make a nation rich without intelligence. 
Whoever had a more fertile soil than the Egyptians? Who have 
handled more silver and gold than the Spaniards? The universal 
cultivation of the mind and heart is the only true source of opu- 
lence; the cultivation of the mind, by which to lay hold on the 
treasures of nature; the cultivation of the heart, by which to de- 
vote those treasures to beneficent uses. Where this cultivation ex- 
ists, no matter how barren the soil or ungenial the clime, there com- 
fort and competence will abonnd; for it 1s the intellectual and moral 
condition of the cultivator that impoverishes the soil, or makes it 
teem with abundance. He who disobeys the law of God in regard 
to the culture of the intellectual and spiritual nature, may live in 


23° 


the valley of the Nile, but he can rear only the “lean kine” of 
Pharaoh ; but he who obeys the highest law, may dwell in the cold 
and inhospitable regions of Scotland or of New England, and 
“‘ well-formed and fat-fleshed kine” shall feed on all his meadows, 
If Pharaoh will be a task-master, and will not let the bond-men go 
free, the corn in his field shall be the “seven thin ears blasted by 
the east wind;” but if he will obey the commandments of the Lord, 
then, behold, there shall be “seven ears of corn upon one stalk, all 
rank and good.” Sir, the sweat of a slave poisons the soil upon 
which it falls; his-breath is mildew to every green thing; his tear 
withers the verdure it drops upon. 

But slavery makes the general education of the whites impossible. 
You cannot have general education without common schools. 
These cannot exist where the population is sparse. Where slaves 
till the soil, or do the principal part of whatever work is done, the 
free population must be sparse. Slavery, then, by an inexorable 
law, denies general education to the whites. The providence of 
God is just and retributive. Create a serf caste and debar them 
from education, and you necessarily debar a great portion of the 
privileged class from education also. It is impossible in the present 
state of things or any which can be foreseen, to have free and univer- 
sal education ina slave State. The difficulty is insurmountable. 
For a well-organized system of common schools, there should be 
two hundred children, at least, living in such proximity to each 
other, that the oldest of them can come together to a central school. 
It is not enough to gather from within a circle of half a dozon miles 
diameter fifty or sixty chidren for a single school. This brings all 
ages and all studies into the same room. A good system requires 
a separation of school children into four, or at Jeast into three classes, 
according to ages and attainments. Without this gradation, a school 
is bereft of more than half its efficiency. Now, this can never be 
done in an agricultural community, where there are two classes of 
men—one to do all the work, and the other to seize all the profits. 
With New England habits of industry, and with that diversified la- 
bor which would be sure to spring from intelligence, the State of 
Virginia, which skirts us here onthe south, would support al] the pop- 
ulation of the New England States, and fill them with abundance. 

Mr. Bayuy. We have as great a population as New England now. 

Mr. Mann. As great a population as New England! 

Mr. Bayty. We send fifteen Representatives. 

(A voice. And how many of them represent slaves ?) 

Mr. Many. Massachusetts alone sends ten Represesentatives. 

(A voice. And the rest of New England twenty-one more.) 

Mr. Mann. I say, sir, the single State of Virginia could support 
in abundance the whole population of New England. With such 
a free population, the school children would be so numerous that 
public schools might be opened within three or four miles of each 
other all over its territory—the light of each of which, blending with 
its neighboring lights, would illumine the whole land. They would 
be schools, too, in point of cheapness, within every man’s means, 


24 


The degrading idea of pauper schools would be discarded forever. 
But what is the condition of Virginia now? One quarter part of 
all its adult free white population, are unable to read or write; and 
were proclaimed so by a late governor, in his annual message, with- 
out producing any reform. ‘Their remedy is to choose a governor 
who will not proclaim such a fact. When has Virginia, in any 
State or national election, given a majority equal to the number of 
its voters unable to read or write? A republican Government sup- 
ported by the two pillars of slavery and ignorance! 

In South Carolina there is also a fund for the support of pauper 
schools; but this had become so useless. and was so disdained by 
its objects, that a late governor of the State, in his annual message, 
recommended that it should be withdrawn from them altogether. 

Yet, in many of the slave States there are beautiful paper-systems 
of common schools —dead laws in the statute books—but the census 
tells. us how profitless they have been. In 1840, in fifteen slave 
States and Territories, there were only 2:)1,085 scholars at the pri- 
mary schools. In the same class of schooJs in the free States, there 
were 1,626,028 —eight times as many. New York alone had 
502,367, or two and a half times as many. ‘The scholars in the- 
primary schools of Ohio alone outnumbered all those in the fifteen 
slave States and ‘Territories, by more than 17,000. In the slave 
States, almost one tenth part of the free white population, over 
twenty years of age, are unable to read and write. In the free 
States less than one in one hundred and fifty ; and at least four-fifths 
of these are foreigners, who ought not be included in the computa- 
tion. Many of the slave States, too, have munificent school funds: 
Kentucky has one of more than a million of dollars, Tennessee of 
two millions; yet, in 1837, Governor Clarke, of Kentucky, declar- 
ed, in his message to the legislature, that “one-third of the adult 
population were unable to write their names ;” and in the State of 
Tennessee, according to the last census, there were 58,531 of the 
same description of persons. Surely it would take more than five 
of these to make three freemen; for, the more a State has of them, 
the less of intelligent freedom will there be in it. And if the 
schools in the slave States are compared with the schools in the free 
States, the deficiency in quality will be as great as the deficiency 
in number. 

Sir, during the last ten years I have had a most extensive corres- 
pondence with the intelligent friends of education in the slave 
States, They yearn for progress, but they cannot obtain it. They 
procure laws to be passed, but there is no one to execute them. 
They set forth the benefits and the blessings of education, but they 
speak in a vacuum, and no one hears the appeal. If a parent wishes 
to educate his children, he must send them from home, and thus suf- 
fer a sort of bereavement, even while they live; or he must employ 
a tutor or governess in his family, which few are able to do. The 
rich may do it, but what becomes of the children of the poor? In 
cities the obstacles are less, but the number of persons resident in 
cities, is relatively small. All this is the inevitable consequence of 


25 


slavery ; and it is as impossible for free, thorough, universa] educa 
tion to co-exist with slavery, as for two bodies to occupy the same 
space at the same time. Slavery would’ abolish education if it 
should invade a free State; education would abolish slavery if it 
could invade a slave State. 

Destroying.common education, slavery destroys the fruits of com- 
mon education—the inventive mind, practical talent, the power of 
adapting means to ends in the business of life. Whence have 
come all those mechanical and scientific improvements and inven- 
tions which have enriched the world with so many comforts, and 
adorned it with so many beauties; which te-day give enjoyments 
and luxuries to a common family in a New England village, which 
neither Queen Elizabeth, of England, nor any of her proud court, 
ever dreamed of but a little more than twe centtries ago. Among 
whom have these improvements originated? Ali history and expe- 
rience affirm that they have come, and must come, from the people 
among whom education is most generous and unconfined. Increase 
the constituency, if I may se speak, of developed intellect, and you 
increase, in an equal ratio, the chances of inventive, creative 
genius. 

From what part of our country have come the application of steam 
to the propulsions of boats for commercial purposes, or of wheels 
for manufacturing purposes? Where have the various and almost 
infinite improvments been made, which have resulted in the present 
perfection of cotton and woollen machinery? Whence came the 
invention of the cotton gin, and the great improvements in railroads ? 
Where was born the mighty genius who invented the first lightning: 
rod, which sends the electric fluid harmless into the earth; or that: 
other genius, not less beneficent, who invented the second lightning: 
rod, which sends the same fluid from city to city on messages of 
business or of affection? Sir, these are results which you can no- 
more have without common education, without imbuing the public 
mind with the elements of knowledge, than youcan have corn with-- 
out planting, or harvests without sunshine. 

Look into the Patent Office reports, and see in what sections of: 
country mechanical improvements, and the application of science to- 
the useful arts, have orivinated. Out of five hundred and seventy-- 
two patents, issued in 1847, only sixty-six were to the slave States.. 
The patents annually issued, it 1s true, are a mingled heap of chaff 
and wheat, but some of it is wheat worthy of Olympus. I think 
the Patent Office reports show, that at least six or eight times as- 
many patents have been taken out for the North as for the South.. 
What improvements will a slave ever make in agricultural imple-. 
ments; in the manufacture of metals; in preparing wool, cotton, 
silk, fur, or paper; in chemical processes; in the application of” 
steam; in philosophical, nautical, or optical instruments; in civil’ 
engineering, architecture, the construction of roads, canals, wharves, 
bridges, docks, piers, &c.; in hydraulics or pneumatics; in the ap-- 
plication of the mechanical powers; in household furniture or wear- 
ing apparel ; ves binding, engraving, &c., &c.? This ques- 


26 


tion, when put in reference to slaves, appears ridiculous; and yet it 
is no more absurd, when asked in reference to an ignorant slave, 
than when asked in reference to an uneducated white man. The fact 
that the latter is a voter makes no difference ; notwithstanding the 
common opinion, in certain latitudes, that it does. All such im- 
provements come from minds which have had an early awakening, 
and been put on scientific trains of thought in their childhood and 
youth—a thing utterly impossible for the people at large, without 
common schools. 

These are causes ;—now look at effects. In three New England 
States the iron manufacture is twenty times as much, according to 
the population, as it is in Virginia, and yet Virginia has far more of 
the ore than they. In cotton, we can hardly find a fraction low 
enough to express the difference. The ship building in Maine and 
Massachusetts is thirty-five times as much as in Virginia. The 
North comes to the South, cuts their timber, carries it home, manu- 
factures it, and then brings it back wrought into a hundred different 
forms, to be sold to those who would see it rot before their eyes. 

Can any man give a reason why Norfolk should not have grown 
like New York, other than the difference in the institutions of the 
people? Jamestown was settled before Plymouth, and had natural 
advantages superior toit. Plymouth now has a population of between 
seven and eight thousand, is worth two millions of dollars, and tax- 
ed itself last year, for schools and school-houses, more than seven 
thousand dollars. I ought rather to say, that it invested more than 
seven thousand dollars in a kind of stock that yields a hundred per 
cent. income. How many bats there may be in the ruins of James- 
town, the last census does not inform us. The books printed at the 
South, I suppose not to be one-fiftieth part the number printed at 
the North. In maps, charts, engravings, and so forth, the elements 
of comparison exist only on one side. 

Out of universal education comes genius, skill, and enterprise, 
and the desire of bettering one’s condition. Industry and frugality 
are their concomitants. Diversified labor secures a home market. 
Diligence earns much, but the absence of the vices of indolence 
saves more. Hence comfort abound, while capital accumulates— 
After the home consumption is supplied, there is a surplus for export. 
The balance of trade is favorable. All the higher institutions of 
learning and religion can be liberally supported. These institutions 
impart an elevated and moral tone to society. Hence efforts for all 
kinds of social ameliorations. ‘Temperance societies spring up. 
Societies for preventing crime; for saving from pauperism ; for the 
reform of prisons and the reformation of prisoners; for peace ; for 
sending missionaries to the heathen, for diffusing the gospel ;—all 
these, where a sound education is given, grow up in the order of 
Providence, as an oak grows out of an acorn. 

In one thing the South has excelled—in training statesmen. The 
primary, and the ultimate effects of slavery upon this fact are so 
well set forth in a late sermon by Dr. Bushnell, of Hartford, Conn., 
that I will read a passage from it: 


27 


“ And here, since this institution of slavery, entering into the for- 
tunes of our history, complicates, in so many ways, the disorders we 
suffer, | must pause a few moments to sketch its characteristics. 
Slavery, it is not to be denied, is an essentially barbarous institution. 
It gives us, too, that sign which is the perpetual distinction of Lar- 
barism, that it has no law of progress. The highest level it reaches, 
is the level at which it begins. Indeed, we need not scruple to 
allow that it has yielded us one considerable advantage, in virtue of 
the fact, that it produces ifs best condition first. For while the 
northern people were generally delving in labor, for many genera- 
tions, to create a condition of comfort, slavery set the masters at 
once on a footing of ease, gave them leisure for elegant intercourse, 
for unprofessional ‘studies, and seasoned their character thus with 
that kind of cultivation which distinguishes men of society. <A 
class of statesmen were thus raised up, who were’ prepared to figure 
as leaders in scenes of public life, where so much depends on man- 
ners and social address, But now the scale is changing. Free 
labor is rising, at length, into a state of wealth, and comfort, to take 
the lead of American society. Meanwhile, the foster sons of slave- 
ry—the high families, the statesmen—gradually receding in charac 
ter, as they must under this vicious institution, are receding also in 
power and influence, and have been ever since the Revolution. 
Slavery is a condition against nature; the curse of nature, therefore, 
is on it, and it bows to its doom by a law as irresistible as gravity. 
It produces a condition of ease, which is not the reward of labor, 
and a state of degradation which is the cnrse of idleness.— 
Therefore, the ease it enjoys cannot but end in a curse, and the 
degradation it suffers, cannot rise into a blessing. It nourishes im- 
perious and violent passions. It makes the masters solitary sheiks 
on their estates, forbidding thus the possibility of public schools, and 
preventing also that condensed form of society which is necessary 
to the vigorous maintenance of churches. Education and religion 
thus displaced, the dinner table only remains, and on this hangs, in 
great part, the keeping of the social state. But however highly we 
may estimate the humanizing power of hospitality, it cannot be re- 
garded as any sufficient spring of character. It. is neither a school 
nor a gospel. And when it comes of self-indulgence, or only seeks 
relief for the tedium of an idle life, scarcely does it bring with it 
the blessings of a virtue. The accomplishments it yields are of a 
mock quality, rather than of a real, having about the same relation 
to a substantial and finished culture that honor has to character. 
This kind of currency will pass no longer; for, it is not expense 
without comfort, or splendor set in disorder, as diamonds in pewter ; 
it is not airs in place of elegance, or assurance substituted for ease ; 
neither is it to be master of a fluent speech, or to garnish the same 
with stale quotations from the classics; much less is it to live in the 
Don Juan vein, accepting barbarism by poetic inspiration—the same 
which a late noble poet, drawing out of Turks and pirates, became 
the chosen laureate of slavery—not any or all of these can make 
up such a style of man, or of life, as ‘we in this age demand. We 


28 


have come up now to @ point where we look for true intellectual re- 
finement, and a ripe state of personal culture. But how clearly is it 
seen to be a violation of its own laws, for slavery to produce a gen- 
uine scholar, or a man, who, in any department of excellence, unless 
it be in politics, is not a full century behind his time. And if we 
ask for what is dearer and better still, for a pure Christian morality, 
the youth of slavery are trained in no such habits as are most con- 
genial to virtue. The point of honor is the only principle many of 
them know. Violence and dissipatidn bring down every succeed- 
ing generation to a state continually lower; so that now, after a 
hundred and fifty years are passed, the slave-holding territory may 
be described as a vast missionary ground, and one so uncomfortable 
to the faithful ministry of Christ, by reason of its jealous tempers, 
and the known repugnance it has to many of the first maxims of 
the gospel, that scareely a missionary can be found to enter it. Con- 
nected with this moral decay, the resources of nature also are ex- 
hausted, and her fertile territories changed to a desert by the uncre- 
ating power of a spendthrift institution. And then, having made a 
waste where God had made a garden, slavery gathers up the relics 
of bankruptcy, and the baser relics still of virtue and all maniy en- . 
terprise, and goes forth to renew, on a virgin soil, its dismal and for- 
lorn history. ‘Thus, at length, has been produced what may be call- 
_ed the bowie-knife style of civilization, and the new west of the 
South is overrun by it—a spirit of blood which defies all laws of 
God and man; honorable, but not honest ; prompt to resent an inju- 
ry, slack to discharge a debt; educated to ease, and readier, of 
course, when the means of living fail, to find them at the gambling 
table or the race ground, than in any work of industry—probably 
squandering the means of living there, to relieve the tedium of 
ease itself.” 

The free schools of the North lead to the common diffusion of 
knowledge and the equalization of society. The private schools of 
the South divide men into patricians, and plebians; so that, in the 
latter, a nuisance grows out of education itself. In the public 
schools of New York there are libraries now amounting to more 
than a million of volumes. In the schools of Massachusetts, the 
number of volumes is relatively less, but the quality is areatly supe- 
rior. In each of these States, within half an hour’s walk of the 
poorest farm-house, or mechanic’s shop, there is a library, free and 
open to every child, containing works of history, biography, travels, 
ethics, natural sciences, &c., &c., which will supply him with the 
noblest capital of intelligence wherewith to commence the business 
of making himself a useful and intelligent citizen. With the ex- 
ception of New Orleans, (whose free schools were commenced and 
have been presided over by a Massachusetts man,) and three or four 
other cities, all the libraries in the public schools of the slave States 
could be carried in a school-boy’s satchel. The libraries of all the 
universities and colleges of the South contain 223,416 volumes; 
those of the North, 593,897 volumes. The libraries of southern 
theological schools, 22,800; those of northern, 102,080. 


29 


Look into Silliman’s Journal, or the volumes of the American 
Academy of Arts and Sciences, and inquire whence the communi- 
cations come? Where live the historians of the country, Sparks, 
Prescott, Bancroft ; the poets, Whittier, Bryant, Longfellow, Lowell; 
the jurists, Story, Kent, Wheaton; the classic models of writing, 
Channing, Everett, Irving; the female writers, Miss Sedgwick, Mrs. 
Sigourney, and Mrs. Childs? All this proceeds from no superiority 
of natural endowment on the one side, or inferiority on the other. 
The Southern States are all within what may be called “ the lati- 
tudes of genius ;” for there is a small belt around the globe, com- 
prising but a few degress of latitude, which has produced all the 
distinguished men who have ever lived. I say this difference re- 
sults from no difference in natural endowment; the mental endow- 
ments at the South are equal to those in any part of the world; but 
it comes because in one quarter the common atmosphere is vivified 
with knowledge, electric with ideas, while slavery gathers its Beo- 
tian fogs over the other. What West Point has been to our armies 
in Mexico, that, and more than that, good schools would be to the 
intelligence and industrial prosperity of our country. 

It may seem a little out of place, but I cannot forbear here 
adverting to one point, which, as a lover of children and a parent, 
touches me more deeply than any other. ‘To whom are entrusted at 
the South the early care and nurture of children? It has been 
thonght by many educators and metaphysicians, that children learn 
as much before the age of seven years as ever afterwards. Who, 
at the South, administers this early knowledge—these ideas, these 
views, that have such sovereign efficacy in the formation of adult 
character? Who has the custody of children during this ductile, 
forming, receptive period of life—a period when the mind absorbs: 
whatever is brought into contact with it? Sir, the children of the 
South, more or less, and generally more, are tended and nurtured by 
slaves, Ignorance, superstition, vulgarity, passion, and perhaps im- 
purity, are the breasts at which they nurse. Whatever other afflic- 
tions Ged may see fit to bring upon me, whatever other mercies he 
may withhold, may He give me none but persons of intelligence, of 
refinement, of moral excellence, to walk with my children during 
the imitative years of their existence, and lead them in the paths of 
knowledge, and breathe into their hearts the breath of a moral life. 

Before considering the moral character of slavery, I wish to ad- 
vert for a moment to the position which we occupy as one of the 
nations of the earth, in this advancing period of the world’s civiliza- 
tion. Nations, like individuals, have a character. The date of the 
latter is counted by years; that of the former by centuries. No 
man can have any self-respect who is not solicitous about his post- 
humous reputation. No man can be a patriot who feels neither joy 
nor shame at the idea of the honor or of the infamy which his age 
and his country shall leave behind them. Nations, like individuals, 
have characteristic objects of ambition. Greece coveted the arts; 
Rome gloried in war; but Liberty has been the goddess of our ido!- 
atry. Amid the storms of freedom were we cradled; in the strug- 


3* 


30 


gles of freedom have our joints been knit; on the rich aliment of 
treedom have we grown to our present stafure. With a somewhat 
too boastful spirit, perhaps, have we challenged the admiration 
of the world for our devotion to liberty ; but an enthusiasm for the 
rights of man is so holy a passion that evenits excesses are not de- 
void of the beautiful. We have not only won freedom for ourselves, 
but we have taught its sacred lessons to others. The shout of 
“ Death to tyrants and freedom for man,” which pealed through this 
country seventy years ago, has at length reached across the Atlan- 
tic; and who ever has given an attentive ear to the sounds which 
have come back to us, within the last few months, from the Huropean 
world, cannot have failed to perceive that they were only the far- 
travelled echoes of the American Declaration of Independence. 
But in the divine face of our liberty there has been one foul, demo- 
niac feature. Whenever her votaries would approach her to wor- 
ship, they have been fain to draw a veil over one part of her visage 
to conceal its hideousness. Whence came this deformity on her 
otherwise fair and celestial countenance ? Sad is the story, but it 
must be told. Her mother was a vampire. As the daughter lay 
helpless in her arms, the beldam tore open her living flesh, and feast- - 
ed upon her life-blood. Hence this unsightly wound, that affrights 
whoever beholds it. But, sir, I must leave dallying with these am- 
biguous metaphors. One wants the plain sinewy Saxon tongue, 
to tell the deeds that should have shamed devils. Great Britain 
was the mother. Her American colonies were the daughters. The 
mother lusted for gold. To get it, she made partnership with rob- 
bery and death. Shackles, chains, and weapons for human butche- 
ry, were her outfit in trade. She made Africa her hunting ground. 
She made its people her prey, and the unwilling colonies her mar- 
ket place. She broke into the Ethiop’s home, as a wolf into a sheep- 
fold at midnight. She set the continent a-flame that she might seize 
the affrighted inhabitants as they ran shrieking from their blazing 
hamlets. ‘The aged and the infant she left for the vultures; but the 
strong men and the strong women she drove, scourged and bleeding, 
to the shore. Packed and stowed like merchandise between unven- 
tilated decks, so close that the tempest without could not ruffle the: 
pestilential air within, the voyage was begun. Once a day the 
hatches were opened to receive food, and disgorge the dead.— 
Thousands and thousands of corpses, which she plunged into the 


~ ocean from the decks of her slave ships, she counted only as the 


— 


tare of commerce. The blue monsters of the deep become familiar 
with her pathway ; and, not more remorseless than she, they shared 
her plunder. At length, the accursed vessel reached the foreign 
shore. And there monsters of the land, fiercer and feller than any 
that roam the watery plains, rewarded the robber by purchasing 
his spoils. 

For more than a century did the madness of this traffic rage. 
During all those years, the clock of eternity never counted a minute 
that did not witness the cruel death, by treachery or violence, of 
some son or daughter, some father or mother, of Africa. The three 


. 


31 


millions of slaves that now darken our southern horizon are the 
progeny of those progenitors ;—a doomed race, fated and suffering 
from sire to son. But the enormities of the mother country did not 
pass without remonstrance. Many of the colonies expostulated 
against, and rebuked them. ‘The New England colonies, New Jer- 
sey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, presented to the throne the most hum- 
ble and suppliant petitions, praying for the abolition of the trade. 
The colonial legislatures passed laws against it. But their petitions 
were spurned from the throne. Their laws were vetoed by the gov- 
ernors. In informal negotiations, attempted with the ministers of 
the crown, the friends of the slaves were made to understand that 
royalty turned an adder’s ear to their prayers. The profoundest 
feelings of lamentation and abhorrence were kindled in the bosoms 
of his western subjects by this flagitious conduct of the king. In 
that dark catalogue of crimes, which led our fathers to forswear al- 
legiance to the British throne, its refusal to prohibit the slave trade 
to the colonies, is made one of the most prominent of those political 
offences which are said to “define a tyrant.” In the original draught 
of the Declaration of Independence, this crime of King George the 
Third, is set forth in the following words: 

“ He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating 
its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant 
people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into 
slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their 
transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobium of in- 
fidel powers, is the warfare of the Curistran king of Great Britain. 
Determined to keep a market where MEN should be bought and 
sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legisla- 
tive attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.” 

Now, if the king of Great Britain prostituted his negative, that 
slavery might not be restricted, what, in after times, shall be said of 
those who prostitute their affirmative, that it may be extended, Yet 
it is now proposed, in some of the State legislatures, and in this 
Capitol, to do precisely the same thing !n regard to the Territory of 
Oregon, which was done by Great Britain to her transatlantic pos- 
sessions ;—not merely to legalize slavery there, but to prohibit its 
inhabitants from prohibiting it. Though three thousand miles west 
of Great Britain, she had certain constitutional rights over us, and 
could affect our destiny. Though the inhabitants of Oregon are 
three thousand miles west of us, yet we have certain constitutional 
rights over them, and can affect their destiny. Great Britain annull- 
ed our laws for prohibiting slavery. We propose to annul an exist- 
ing law of Oregon prohibiting slavery. If the execrations of man- 
kind are yet too feeble and too few to punish Great Britain for her 
wickedness, what scope, what fulness, what eternity of execration 
and anathema, will be a sufficient retribution upon us, if we volun- 
teer to copy her example. It was in the eighteenth century, when 
the mother country thus made merchandise of human beings—a 
time when liberty was a forbidden word in the language of Europe. 
It-is in the nineteenth century, that we propose to. re-enact, and on 


32 


an ampler scale, the same execrable villainy—a time when liberty 
is the rallying-cry of all Christendom. So great has been the pro- 
gress of liberal ideas, within the last century, that what was venial 
at its beginning, is unpardonable at its close. ‘lo drive coffles of 
slaves from here to Oregon, in the middle of the nineteenth centu- 
ry, is more infamous than it was to bring cargoes of slaves from 
Africa here, in the middle of the eighteenth. Yet such is the pe- 
riod that men would select, to perpetuate and to increase the hor- 
rors of this traffic. 

Sir, how often, on this floor, have indignant remonstrances been 
addressed to the North, for agitating the subject of slavery? How 
often have we at the North been told that we were inciting insur- 
rection, fomenting a servile war, putting the black man’s knife to 
the white man’s throat? The air of this Hal) has been filled, its 
walls have been as it were sculptured, by southern eloquence, with 
images of devastated towns, of murdered men and ravished wo- 
men; and, as a defence against the iniquities of the institution, 
they have universally put in the plea that the calamity was entail-. 
ed upon them by the mother country, that it made a part of the 
world they were born into, and therefore, they could not help it. I 
have always been disposed to allow its full weight to this palliation. 
But if they now insist upon perpetrating, against the whole West- 
ern world, which happens at present to be under our control, the. 
same wrongs which, in darker days, Great Britain perpetrated 
against them, they will forfeit every claim to sympathy. Sir, here 
isa test. Let not Southern men, who would now force slavery 
upon new regions, ever deny that their slavery at home is a chosen, 
voluntary, beloved crime. 

But let us look, sir, at the moral character of slavery. It is pro- 
posed not merely to continue this institution where it now exists, 
but to extend it to the Pacific ocean—to spread it over the vast 
slopes of the Rocky mountains. Sir, the conduct of governments, 
like the conduct of individuals, is subject to the laws and the retri- 
butions of Providence. — If, therefore, there is any ingredient of 
wrong in this institution, we ought not to adopt it, or to permit it, 
even though it should pour wealth in golden showers. over the 
whole surface of the land. In speaking of the moral character of 
slavery, sir, 1 mean to utter no word for the purpose of wounding 
the feelings of any man. On the other hand, I mean not to wound 
the cause of truth by abstaining from the utterance of a word 
which | ought to speak. 

The institution of slavery is against natural right. Jorists, from 
the time of Justinian—orators, from the time of Cicero—poets, 
from the time of Homer—declare it to be wrong. The writers on 
moral or ethical science—the expounders of the law of nations and 
of God—denounce slavery as an invasion of the rights of man. 
They find no warrant for it in the eternal principles of justice and 
equity; and in that great division which they set forth between 
right and wrong, they arrange slavery in the catalogue of Crime. 
All the noblest instincts of human nature rebel against it. .What- 


33 


w 

ever has been taught by sage, or sung by poet, in favor of freedom, 
is a virtual condemnation of slavery. Whenever we applaud the 
great champions of liberty, who, by the sacrifice of life in the 
cause of freedom, have won the homage of the world and an im- 
mortality of fame, we record the testimony of our hearts against 
slavery. Wherever patriotism and philanthropy have glowed bright- 
est—wherever piety and a devout religious sentiment have burned 
most fervently, there has been the most decided recognition of the 
universal rights of man. 

Sir, let us analyze this subject, and see if slavery be not the 
most Compact, and concentrated, and condensed system, of wrong, 
which the depravity of man has ever invented. Slavery is said to 
have had its origen in war. It is claimed that the captor had a 
right to take the life of his captive ; and that if he spared that life, 
he made it his own, and thus acquired a right to contro} it. I deny 
the right of the captor to the life of his captive; and even if this 
right were conceded, I deny his right to the life of the captive’s 
offspring. But this relation between captor and captive precludes 
the idea of peace ; for no peace can be made where there is no 
free agency. Peace being precluded, it follows inevitably that the 
state of war continues. Hence, the state of slavery is a state of 
war; and though active hostilities may have ceased, they are liable 
to break out, and may rightfully break out, at any moment. How 
long must our fellow citizens, who were enslaved in Algiers, have 
continued in slavery, before they would have Jost the right of es- 
cape or of resistance ? 

The gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Bococx,) in his speech this 
morning, put the right of the slareholder upon a somewhat different 
ground. He said a man might acquire property in a horse before 
the existence of civil society, by catching a wild one. And so, he 
added, one man might acquire property in another man by subdu- 
ing him to his will. The superior force gave the right, whether to 
the horse or to the man. Now, if this be so, and if at any time the 
superior force should change sides, then it follows inevitably, that 
the relation of the parties might be rightfully changed by a new 
appeal to force. 

The same gentleman claims Bible authority for slavery. He 
says: “J see slavery there tolerated, I had almost said inculcated. I 
see such language as this: § Both thy bondmen and thy bondmaids, 
shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall 
you buy bondmen and bondmaids; and ye shall take them as an 
inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a pos- 
session,” &c. Does not the gentleman know that the same au- 
thority, at a much later period, commanded the Israelitish slaves to 
despoil their Egyptian masters, and to escape from bondage ? 
Surely the latter is the better authority, for it is of subsequent 
date. If the gentleman’s argument is sound, he is bound to advo- 
cate a repeal of the act of 1793. Ifthe gentleman’s argument is 
sound, the free States, instead of surrendering fugitive slaves to 
their masters, are bound to give those masters a Red-sea reception 


34 


and embrace; and the escape of the children of Israel into Canaan 
is a direct precedent for the underground railroad to Canada. 

Both the gentlemen from Kentucky, (Mr. Frencu,) yesterday, 
and the gentleman from Virginia to-day, spoke repeatedly, and 
without the slightest discrimination, of “aslave and a horse,” “a 
slave and a mule,” &c. What should we think, sir, of a teacher 
for our children, or even of a tender of our cattle, who did not re- 
cognize the difference between men and mules—between humanity 
and horse flesh? What should we think, if, on opening a work, 
Claiming to be a scientific treatise on Zoology, we should find the 
author to be ignorant of the difference between biped and quadru- 
ped, or between men and birds, or men and fishes? Yet such er- 
rors would be trifling compared with those which have been made 
through all this debate. They would be simple errors in natural 
history, perhaps harmless; but these are errors—fatal errors—in 
humanity and Christian ethics. No, sir; all the legislation of the 
slave States proves that they do not treat, and cannot treat, a hu- 
man being as an animal. I will show that they are-ever trying to 
degrade him into an animal, although they can never succeed. 

This conscious idea that the state of slavery is a state of war— 
a state in which superior force keeps inferior force down—de- 
velops and manifests itself perpetually. It exhibits itself in the 
statute books of the slave States, prohibiting the education of 
slaves, making it highly penal to teach them so much as the alpha- 
bet; dispersing and punishing all meetings where they come to- 

ether in quest of knowledge. Look into the statute books of the 
ree States, and you will find law after law, encouragement after 
encouragement, to secure the diffusion of knowledge. Look into 
the statute books of the slave States, and you find law after law, 
penalty after penalty, to secure the extinction of knowledge. Who 
has not read with delight those books which have been written, 
both in England and in this country, entitled, “ The Pursuits of 
Knowledge under Difficulties,” giving the biographies of illustri- 
ous men, who, by an undaunted and indomitable spirit, had risen 
from poverty and obscurity to the heights of eminence, and bless- 
ed the world with their achievements in literature, in science, and 
in morals? Yet here, in what we call republican America, are fif- 
teen geat States, vieing with each other to see which will bring 
the blackest and most impervious pall of ignorance over thfee mil- 
lions of human-beings ; nay, which can do most to stretch this pall 
across the continent, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. 

Is not knowledge a good? Is it not one of the most precious 
bounties which the all-bountiful Giver has bestowed upon the hu- 
man race? Sir John Herschell, possessed of ample wealth, his 
capacious mind stored with the treasures of knowledge, surround- 
ed by the most learned society in the most cultivated metropolis in 
the world, says: “If ] were to pray fora taste which should stand 
me in stead, under every variety of circumstances, and be a source 
af happiness and cheerfulness to me through life, and a shield 
against its ills, however things might go amiss, and the world frown 


33 


upon me, it would be a taste for reading.” Yet it is now proposed 
to colonize the broad regions of the West with millions of our fel- 
low beings, who shall never be able to read a book or write a word; 
to whom knowledge shall bring no delight in childhood, no relief, 
in the weary hours of sickness or convalescence, no solace in the 
decrepitude of age; who shall perceive nothing of the beauties of 
art, who shall know nothing of the wonders of science, who shall 
never reach any lofty, intellectual conception of the attributes of 
their great Creator; deaf to all the hosannas of praise which 
nature sings to her Maker ; blind in this magnificent temple which 
God has builded. 

Sir, it is one of the noblest attributes of man that he can derive 
knowledge from his predecessors. We possess the accumulated 
learning of ages. [From ten thousand confluent streams, the river 
of truth, widened and deepened, has come down to us; and it is 
among our choicest delights that if we can add to its volume, as it 
rolls on, it will bear a richer freight of blessings to our successors. 
But it is proposed to annul this beneficent law of nature; to repel 
this proffered bounty of Heaven. It is proposed to create a race 
of men, to whom all the lights of experience shal] be extinguish- 
ed; whose hundredth generation shall be as ignorant and as barba- 
rous as its first. 

Sir, I hold all voluntary ignorance to. be a crime ; | hold all en- 
forced ignorance to be a greater crime. Knowledge is essential 
to all rational enjoyment;.it is essential to the full and adequate 
performance of every duty. Whoever intercepts knowledge, there- 
fore, on its passage to a human soul; whoever strikes down the 
hand that is outstretched to grasp it, is guilty of one of the most 
heignous of offences. Add to your virtue, knowledge, says the 
apostle; but here the command is, be-cloud and be-little by igno- 
rance, whatever virtue you may possess. 

Sir, let me justify the earnestness of these expressions, by de- 
scribing the transition of feeling through which | have lately pass- 
ed. 1 come from a community where knowledge ranks next to 
virtue, in the classification of blessings. On the tenth day of April 
last, the day before | left home for this place, I attended the dedi- 
cation of a school-house in Boston, which had cost $70,000. The 
Mayor presided, and much of the intelligence and worth of the 
city was present on the occasion. {[ see by a paper which | have 
this day received, that another school-house, in the same city, was 
dedicated on Monday of the present week. It was there stated by 
the Mayor, that the cost of city school-houses, which had been 
completed within the last three months, was $200,000. On Tues- 
day of this week, a new high school-house, in. the city of Cam- 
bridge, was dedicated. Mr. Everett, President of Harvard College, 
was present, and addressed the assembly. in a long, and, 1 need not 
add, a most beautiful speech. That school-bouse, with two others 
to be dedicated within a week, will have cost $25,000. Last week, 
in the neighboring city of Charlestown, a new high school-house 
of a most splendid and costly character, was dedicated by the 


36 


Mayor and city government, by clergy and laity. But it is not 
Mayors of cities, and Presidents of colleges alone, that engage in 
the work of consecrating temples of education to the service of 
the young. Since I have been here, the Governor of the Com- 
monwealth, Mr. Briggs, went to Newburyport, a distance of forty 
miles, to attend the dedication of a school-house, which cost 
$25,000. Ona late occasion,.when the same excellent Chief Mag- 
istrate travelled forty miles to attend the dedication of a school- 
house in the country, some speaker congratulated the audience be- 
cause the Governor of the Commonwealth had come down from the 
Executive Chair to honor the occasion. ‘ No,” said he, “f have 
-come up to the occasion to be honored by it.” Within the last 
year, $200,000 have been given by individuals to Harvard College. 
Within a little longer time than this, the other two colleges in the 
State have received, together, a still larger endowment, from indi- 
viduals or the State. 

These measures are part of a great system which we are carry- 
ing on for the elevation of the race. Last year the voters of Mas- 
sachusetts, in their respective towns, voluntarily taxed themselves 
about a million of dollars for the support of common schools, We- 
have an old law on the statute book, requiring towns to tax them- 
selves for the support of public schools, but the people have long 
since lost sight of this law in_the- munificence of their contribu- 
tions. Massachusetts is now erecting a reform school for vagrant 
and exposed children—so many of whom come to us from abroad— 
which will cost the State more than a hundred thousand dollars. 
An unknown individual has given $20,000 towards it. We edu- 
cate all our deaf and dumb and blind. An appropriation was made 
by the last legislature, to establish a school for idiots, in imitation 
of those beautiful institutions in Paris, in Switzerland, and in Ber- 
lin, where the most revolting and malicious of this deplorable class 
are tamed into docility, made lovers of order -and neatness, and 
capable of performing many valuable services. The future teacher 
of this schoo] is now abroad, preparing himself for his work. 

A few years ago, Mr. Everett, the present President of Harvard 
College, then Governor of the Commonwealth, spoke the deep con- 
victions of Massachusetts people, when, in a public address on edu- 
cation, he exhorted the fathers and mothers of Massachusetts in the 
following words: “Save,” said he, ‘save, spare, scrape, stint, 
starve, do any thing but steal,” to educate your children. And Dr. 
Howe, the noble-hearted director of the Institution for the Blind, 
lately uttered the deepest sentiments of our citizens when, in speak- 
ing of our duties to the blind, the deaf and dumb, and the idiotic, he 
said: ‘The sight of any human being, left to brutish ignorance, is 
always demoralizing to the beholders, There floats not upon the 
stream of life a wreck of humanity, so utterly shattered and crippled, 
but that its signals of distress should challenge attention and com- 
mand assistance.” 

Sir, it was all glowing and fervid with sentiments like these, that a 
few weeks ago I entered this House—sentiments transfused into my 


37 


soul from without, even if I had no vital spark of nobleness to kindle 
them within. Imagine, then, my strong revulsion of feeling, when 
the first set, elaborate speech which I heard, was that of the gentle- 
man from Virginia, proposing to extend ignorance to the ‘uttermost 
bounds of this Republic; to legalize it, to enforce it, to.necessitate 
it, and make it eternal. Since him, many others have advocated 
the same abhorrent doctrine. Not satisfied with dooming a whole 
race of our fellow-beings to mental darkness, impervious and ever- 
lasting—not satisfied with drawing this black curtain of ignorance 
between man and nature, between the human soul and its God, from 
the Atlantic to the Rio Grande, across half the continent—they 
desire to increase this race ten, twenty, millions more, and to unfold 
and spread ont this black curtain across the other half of the conti- 
nent. When, sir, in the halls of legislation, men advocate measures 
like this, it is no figure of speech to say, that their words are the 
clanking of multitudinous fetters ; each gesture of their arms tears 
human flesh with ten thousand whips; each exhalation of their 
breath spreads clouds of moral darkness from horizon to horizon. 

Twenty years ago a sharp sensation ran through the nerves of 
the civilized world at the story of a young man, named Caspar 
Hause¥, found in the city of Nuremberg, in Bavaria. Though 
sixteen or seventeen years of age, he could not walk nor talk. He 
heard without understanding ; he saw without perceiving ; he moved 
without definite purpose. It was the soul of an infant in the body 
of an adult. After he had learned to speak, he related that, from: 
his earliest recollection, he had always been kept in a hole so small 
that he could not stretch out his limbs, where he saw no light, 
heard no sound; nor even witnessed the face of the attendant who 
brought him his scanty food. For many years, conjecture was rife 
concerning his history, and all Germany was searched to discover 
his origin. After a long period of fruitless inquiry and speculation, 
public opinion settled down into the belief that he was the victim of 
some great, unnatural crime; that he was the heir to some throne, 
and had been sequestered by ambition; or the inheritor of vast 
wealth, and had been hidden away by cupidity ; or the offspring of 
criminal indulgence, and had been buried alive to avoid exposure 
and shame. A German, Von Feuerbach, published an account of 
Caspar, entitled “The Example of a Crime on the Life of the 
Soul.” But why go to Europe to be thrilled with the pathos of a 
human being shrouded from the light of nature, and cut off from a 
knowledge of ditty and of God? ‘To-day, in this boasted land of 
light and liberty, there are three million Caspar Hausers; and, as if 
this were not enough, it is proposed to multiply their number tenfold, 
and to fill up the’ Western world with these proofs of human avarice 
and guilt. It is proposed that we ourselves should create, and 
should publish to the world, not one, but untold millions of “ Exam- 
ples of a Crime on the Life of the Soul.” It is proposed that the: 
self-styled freemen, the self-styled Christians, of fifteen great States 
in this American Union, shall engage in the work of procreating, 
rearing, and ee Caspar Hausers, often from their own loins; and 


38 


if any further development of soul or of body is allowed to the 
American victims than was permitted to the Bavarian child, it is 
only because such development will increase their market value at 
the barracoons. It is not from any difference of motive, but only 
the better to insure that motive’s indulgence. The slave child must 
be allowed to use his limbs, or how could he drudge out his life in 
the service of his master? Theslave infant must be taught to walk, 
or how, under the shadow of this thrice glorious Capitol, could he 
join a coffle for New Orleans ? 

[ know, sir, that it has been said, within a short time past, that 
Caspar Hauser was an imposter, and his story a fiction. Would to 
God that this could ever be said of his fellow victims in America. 

For another reason slavery is an unspeakable wrong. ‘The slave 
is debarred from testifying against a white man. The courts will 
not hear him as a witness. By the principles of the common law, if 
any man suffers violence at the hands of another, he can prefer his 
complaint to magistrates, or to the grand juries of the courts, who 
are bound to give him redress. Hence the Jaw is said to hold up its 
shield before every man for his protection. It surrounds him in the 
crowded street and in the solitary place. It guards his treasures 
with greater vigilance than locks or iron safes; and against medi- 
tated ageressions upon himself, his wife, or his children, it fastens 
his doors every night, more securely than triple bolts of brass. But 
all these sacred protections are denied to the slave. While subject- 
ed to the law of force, he is shut out from the law of right. To 
suffer injury is his, but never to obtain redress. For personal cruel- 
ties; for stripes that shiver his flesh and blows that break his bones; 
for robbery or for murder, neither he nor his friends have preventive, 
remedy, or recompense. The father, who is a slave, may see son or 
daughter scored, mangled, mutilated, ravished, before his eyes, and 
he must be dumb as a sheep before his shearers. The wife may be 
dishonored in the presence of the husband, and, if he remonstrates 
or rebels, the miscreant who could burn with the lust, will burn not 
less fiercely with a vengeance to be glutted upon his foiler. 

Suppose suddenly, by some disastrous change in the order of 
nature, an entire kingdom, or community, were to be enveloped in 
total darkness—to have no day, no dawn, but midnight evermore ? 
Into what infinite forms of violence and wrong would the depraved 
passions of the human heart spring up, when no longer restrained by 
the light of day, and the dangers of exposure! So far as legal 
rights against his oppressors are concerned, the slave lives in such 
a world of darkness. A hundred of his fellows may stand around 
him and witness the wrongs he suffers, but not one of them can ap- 
peal to jury, magistrate, or judge, for punishment or redress. The 
wickedest white man, in a company of slaves, bears a charmed life. 
There is not one of the fell passions that rages in his bosom which 
he cannot indulge with wantonness, and to satiety, and the court has 
no ears to hear the complaint of the victim. How dearly does every 
honorable man prize character! The law denies the slave a char- 
acter; for, however traduced, legal vindication is impossible. 


39 


And yet, infinitely flagrant as the anomaly is, the slave is amena- 
ble to the laws of the land for all offences which he may commit 
against others, though he is powerless to protect himself by the same 
law from offences whieh others may commit against him. He may 
suffer all wrong, and the courts will not hearken to his testimony ; 
but for the first wrong he does, the same courts inflict their severest 
punishments upon him. This is the reciprocity of slave law—to be 
forever liable to be proved guilty, but never able to prove himself 
innocent; to be subject to all punishments, but, through his own 
oath, to no protection, Hear what is said by the highest judicial 
tribunal of South Carolina. “ Although slaves are held to be the 
absoiute property of their owners, yet they have the power of com- 
mitting crimes.” 2d Nott and McCord’s Rep., 179. A negro is so 
far amenable to the common law, that he may be one of three to 
constitute the number necessary to make a riot. Ist Bay’s Rep., 
308. By the laws of the same State, a negro may be himself stolen, 
and he has no redress ; but if he steals a negro from another he shall 
be hung. 2d Nott and McCord’s Rep., 179. (An example of this 
penalty suffered by a slave.) This is the way that slave legislatures 
and slave judicatories construe the command of Christ, “ Whatso- 
ever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye also the same 
unto them.” Nay, by the laws of some of the slave States, where 
master and slave are engaged in a joint act, the slave is indictable, 
while the master is not. 

What rights are more sacred or more dear to us than the conjugal 
and the parental? No savage nation, however far removed from the 
frontiers of civilization, has ever yet been discovered, where these 
rights were unknown or unhonored. ‘The beasts of the forest feel 
and respect them. It is only in the land of slaves that they are 
blotted out and annihilated. 

Slavery is an unspeakable wrong to the conscience. The word 
* conscience” conveys a complex idea. It includes conscientious- 
ness ; that is, the sentiment or instinct of right and wrong; and in- 
telligence which is the guide of this sentiment. Conscience, then, 
implies both the desire or impulse to do right, and also a knowledge 
of what is right. Nature endows us with the sentiment, but the 
knowledge we must acquire. Hence we speak of an “ enlightened 
conscience ”—meaning thereby not only the moral sense, but that 
knowledge of circumstances, relations, tendencies, and _ results, 
which is necessary in order to guide the moral sense to just conclu- 
sions. Fach of these elements is equally necessary to enable a man 
to feel right and to act right. Mere knowledge, without the moral 
sense, can take no cognizance of the everlasting distinctions be- 
tween right and wrong, and so the blind instinct, unguided by 
knowledge, will be forever at fault in its conclusions. The two 
were made to coexist and operate together, by Him who made the 
human soul. But the impious hand of man divorces these twin- 
capacities, wherever it denies knowledge. If one of these co-ordi- 
nate powers in the mental realm be annulled by the legislature, it 
may be called law; but it is repugnant to every law and attribute 


of God. 


40 


But, not satisfied with having invaded the human soul, and anni- 
hilated one of its most sacred attributes, in the persons of three 
millions of our fellow men; not satisfied with having killed the con- 
science, as far as it ean be killed by human device, and human 
force, in an entire race; we are now invoked to multiply that race, 
to extend it over regions yet unscathed by its existence, and there 
to call into being other millions of men, upon whose souls, and upon 
the souls of whose posterity, the same unholy spoliation shall be 
committed forever. 

Slavery is an unspeakable wrong to the religious nature of man. 
The dearest and most precious of all human rights is the right of 
private judgment in matters of religion. Iam interested in nothing 
else so much as in the attributes of my Creator; and in the relations 
which he has established between me and Himself, for time and 
for eternity. To investigate for myself these relations, and their 
momentous consequences ; to “search the Scriptures ;’ to explore 
the works of God in the outward and visible universe; to ask coun- 
sel of the sages and divines of the ages gone by ;—these are rights 
which it would be sacrilege in me to surrender; which it is worse 
sacrilege in any human being, or human government to usurp. 
Yet, by denying education to the slave, you destroy not merely the 
right but the power of personal examination, in regard to all that 
most nearly concerns the soul’s interests. Whoso base as not to 
reverence the mighty champions of religious freedom, in days when 
the dungeon, the rack, and the fagot were the arguments of a gov- 
ernment theology? Who does not reverence, I say, Wickliffe, 
Huss, Luther, and the whole army of martyrs, whose blood reddened 
the axe of English intolerance? Yet it was only for this nght of 
private judgment, for this independence of another man’s control, in 
religious cuncernments, that the God-like champions of religious 
liberty periled themselves and perished. Yet it is this very religious 
despotism over millions of men, which it is now proposed, not to 
destroy, but to create. It is proposed not to break old fetters and 
cast them away, but to forge new ones and rivet them on. Sir, on 
the continent of Europe, and in the Tower of London, I have seen 
the axes, the chains, and other horrid implen:ents of death, by which 
the great defenders of freedom for the soul were brought to their 
final doom; by which political and religious liberty was cloven 
down; but fairer and lovelier to the view were axe and chain, and 
all the ghastly implements of death, ever invented by religious 
bigotry, or civil despotism, to wring and torture freedom out of the 
soul of man ;—fairer and lovelier were they all, than the parchment- 
roll of this House, on which shall be inscribed a law for profaning 
one additional foot of American soil with the curse of slavery. 

[Here the Chairman’s hammer announced the close of the hour. 
Mr. Mann had but one topic more which he designed to elucidate ;— 
the inevitable tendency of slavery to debase the standard both of 
private and of public morals in any community where it exists.] 


4] 


LETTER FROM MARTIN VAN BUREN. | 


Linprenwa.p, Aveust 2, 1848. 
Gentlemen :-— 

It has occurred to me, that a direct communication of my 
feelings, upon a single point, may in one event serve to re- 
move embarrassment in your action at Buffalo. You all 
know, from my letter to the Utica Convention, and the con- 
fidence vou repose in my sincerity, how greatly the proceed- 
ings of that body, in relation to myself, were opposed to my 
earnest wishes. 

Some of you have also had opportunities to satisfy your- 
selves, from personal observation, of the sacrifices of feelings 
and interests which I incurred in submitting my future action 
to its control. None of you need be assured of the extent 
to whichothose feelings were relieved, by the consciousness 
that, in yielding to the decision of that body, that the use of 
my name was necessary to enable the ever faithful Democra- 
cy of New York to sustain themselves in the extraordinary 
position into which they have been driven by the injustice of 
others. I availed myself of an opportunity to testify to them 
my enduring gratitude for the many favors I had received at 
their hands. 

The Convention of which you will form a part, may, if 
wisely conducted, be productive of more important conse- 
quences than any which has gone before it, save only, that 
which framed the federal constitution. In one respect, it 
will be wholly unlike any convention which has been held in 
the United States, since the present organization of parties. 
Tt will, in a great degree, be composed of individuals who 
have, all their lives, been arrayed on different sides in politics, 
State and National, and who still differ in regard to most of 
the questions that have “risen in the adm#nistration of the 
respective governments; but who feel themselves called apan, 
by considerations of the highest importance, to suspend rival 
action on other subjects, and unite their common efforts for the 
accomplishment of a high end—the prevention of the intro- 
duction of human Slavery into the extensive territories of the 
United States, now exempt from that great evil, and which 
are destined, if properly treated, to be speedily converted into 
a wilderness of freemen. I need not say how cordially I con- 

4* 


42 


cur in the sentiment which regards this great object as one 
sacred in the sight of Heaven; the accomplishment of which 
is due to the memories of the great and just men long since, 
we trust, made perfect in its courts, who laid the foundation 
of our government, and made, as they fondly hoped, adequate 
provision for its perpetuity and success, and is indispensable 
to the future honor and permanent welfare of our entire con- 
federacy. 

It may happen, in the course of the deliberations of the. 
Convention, that you may become satisfied that the great end 
of your proceedings can, in your opinion, be best prompted 
by an abandonment of the Utica nomination. You will not, 
in that event, want assurances of my uniform desire never 
again to be a candidate for the Presidency, or for any other 
public office; but you may apprehend that it might not be 
agreeable to me to be superseded in the nomination after 
what has taken place in regard to it. It is upon this point — 
that I desire to protect you against the slightest embarrass- 
ment, by assuring you, as I very sincerely and cheerfully do, 
that, so far from experiencing any mortification from such‘a 
result, it would become most satisfactory to my feelings and 
wishes. 

Wishing the Convention success and honor in its patriotic 
efforts, and begging to accept for yourselves assurances of 
my unfeigned respect, 

Tam, very sincerely, 
Your friend and servant, 


M. VAN BUREN. 





LETTER FROM JOSHUA LEAVITT, 
To the Members of the Liberty Party of the United States. 


Frienps AND Fetitow-Laporerg,in A GLorious Cause :— 
Before this letter meets your eyes, you will have learned the 
result of the Convention held at Buffalo, on the 9th instant. 
In a meeting of our brethren, held yesterday morning, in that 
city, it was voted that a Committee be appointed to give you 
an account of the matter, describe the steps by which we 
have been led along thus far, and express to you our unani- 
mous conviction that the result is all right, and our high 
gratification with it, as the very best thing which could have 


43 


been done for 'ru#e Cause which we all have so much at heart. 
It is not only as God would have it, but His hand and His 
love have been too conspicuously displayed in bringing it to 
pass, to admit of a doubt that heshas done it in mercy, for 
the salvation of our beloved country. 

The persons named for this service, were, Samuel Lewis, 
of Ohio; Martin Mitchell, of New York; Stephen S. Eard- 
ing, of Indiana; Erastus Hussey, of Michigan; Lawrence 
Brainerd, of Vermont; William H. Burleigh, of Connecti- 
cut; I. Codding, of Wisconsin; Owen Lovejoy, of Illinois, 
and myself. Most of these persons were seen, and not only 
desired that I should be their amanuensis, but consented that 
I should attach their signatures to whatever I should prepare, 
as we were to be at once too widely scattered to allow of any 
further conference, even by letter, without defeating our ob- 
ject by delay. Having thus shown that I do not thrust my- 
self forward, unauthorized, in thus addressing you, I prefer, 
for greater freedom, to speak in the first person, so that they 
shall stand vouchers for the trust undertaken, and I alone 
may be responsible for the manner of its performance. And, 
being unexpectedly detained, for a few hours, in the city of 
Rochester, | thought it best to lose no time in executing the 
duty. I felt, moreover, that it was not inappropriate to write, 
in the place where the ground was first broken for our or- 
ganization, in September, 1839, and after refreshing my 


spirit, by a visit to the grave of MYRON HOLLEY, 
“THE FRIEND OF THE SLAVE, 


AS WELL AS 


ONE OF THE EARLIEST 
OF THE 


FOUNDERS OF THAT PARTY,” 


I left home for Buffalo, under anxious apprehensions that 
the Liberty party, after a pure and honorable career, thus far, 
might be brought to a dishonorable end. I feared, that under 
the pressure of a deep desire to stay the spread of slavery, 
and amid the excitement of an immense assembly, our 
members would be hurried away to abandon our platform of 
principles, and basely desert our loved and admired standard- 
bearer, sO as to weaken his hands, and discourage his heart, 
in the commanding position in which his merits and our 
confidence had placed him. We were all actuated by so 
intense a desire for union, that I was afraid we should lay our 
platform too weak in its foundation, or too narrow in its 


44 


compass, to hold up the ordnance with which we must batter 
down the citadel of slavery. Just before the Convention, 
some of the papers friendly to Mr. Van Buren, declared that 
the Utica nomination could not be withdrawn, and that Mr. 
Van Buren must be a candidate, whether he should obtain 
the nomination at Buffalo or not. His letter to the Utica 
Convention was too unsatisfactory to us to be the basis of 
union, and the appearance of dictation was too disrespectful 
to be submitted to, without a sacrifice of self-respect. And 
yet [ feared that the friends of Mr. Hale would be so much 
in haste to make sacrifices for the cause, that they would 
yield to all this, without duly considering what we owed to 
the honor of the Liberty party and its candidates. 

As: I travelled somewhat leisurely through the State of 
New York, I was agreeably impressed by the tone of candor 
and respect which the friends of Mr. Van Buren exhibited 
towards Mr. Hale and the Liberty party, and the utter absence | 
of any thing like attempts either to coax or coerce us to the 
support of their candidate. ‘They seemed to appreciate the 
delicacy of our position, by its resemblance to their own, 
and to feel, that it would be better for us to continue our 
separate organizations, than that either should be given up 
with dishonor. Indeed, both their hopes and my own, of 
effecting a satisfactory union, were far from being as strong 
as our wishes were ardent. 

My position, during all the proceedings of the Convention, 
was as favorable as could be desired for forming a correct 
judgment as to their character. I was a member of the 
informal or provisional committee, appointed by the delegates 
who were on the ground the day before the Convention. 
The necessary preliminary arrangements were all completed 
with admirable harmony and despatch, until we came to 
consider the mode of procedure, by which the business 
before us was to be transacted, in such an immense assembly, 
with the requisite deliberation, and with due regard to the 

rights and wishes of all Here we were, distrac ted with a va- 
riety of schemes,—almost as many as there were minds. The 
subject was at length referred to a select committee of one 
from each State represented ; and this committee, after an 
ineffectual attempt to come to some conclusion, put it into 
the hands of a sub-committee, consisting of Hon. Mr. Bascom, 
of Seneca Falls, Hon, Mr. Hamlin, of Columbus, both Whigs, 
Dr. Snodgrass, of Baltimore, and myself. Next morning, 
three projects were presented and considered, and Mr. 


45 


Bascom’s plan was unanimously approved, reported, and 
adopted ; and it carried us happily through, without the least 
jarring or confusion. ‘ 

In the organization of the Convention, I became a member 
of the Committee on Resolutions, consisting of three from 
each State represented, on whom devolved the duty of framing 
a platform of principles, to be the basis of our political union. 
This general committee, after consultation, referred the work 
to a sub-committee of seven, whose labors, as I was not 
among them, | would commend, with unqualified approval, 
did they not speak for themselves, in a manner wholly above 
my feeble praise. Before the meeting of the committee on 
Thursday morning, the Hon. Stephen C. Phillips, of Mas- 
sachusetts, met me, with a sad heart, and said, he did not 
know what to do, for he could not see how it was possible 
he should agree to support Mr. Van Buren, without a sacrifice 
which no man ought to make. But, after the committee had 
met, and received the report of the sub-committee, with the 
announcement that it was unanimous, Mr. Phillips took the 
first opportunity to speak, and with deep emotion, declared, 
that if that platform could bé accepted, with equal unanimity, 
by the committee, and if the Convention itself would adopt it 
as their basis, there was nothing else the Convention might 
do, which he would not support cheerfully and cordially. 
All this was done with perfect ease, and to universal satis- 
faction and delight. ‘The way was now prepared for the 
selected delegates from the several States to retire, and make 
the required nominations, to represent and carry out the 
objects of the platform. 

At this stage, before the first or ‘‘informal”’ ballot, it 
became necessary, in the opinion of the Conferences, to hear 
from Mr. Van Buren, through his most intimate and faithful 
friend, Hon Benj. F. Butler. Mr. Butler’s course, in the com- 
mittees, had been such, as to win the respect and confidence 
of all, thus far, and he was listened to, with the deepest 
interest, in a detailed statement of the steps by which Mr. 
Van Buren had been brought to consent to the use of his 
name by the Utica Convention, when it seemed necessary to 
the support of his old political friends, in their separation 
from the patty, as represented in the Baltimore Convention. 
This consent was given, when the movement was confined 
to his own State and his own party, and before any mortal 
could have forseen such a movement as this. Mr. Butler 
also detailed, with great frankness, the rapid change which 


46 


had taken place in his views, and the views and feelings of 
his friends on this whole subject of slavery, and his cordial 

satisfaction in the platform, for which he gave much credit 

to Mr. Chase of Cincinnati, the chairman of the Conferees. 

Referring again to Mr. Van Buren, he said, it was impossible 

to say, whether he would assent to the platform, as he had 

not seen it, and could not, for it was adopted only three hours 

ago. But if he should receive the nomination, his acceptance 
of it would include his cordial approval of the platform, and 

his consent to stand as its representative before the country. 

And he would say, from all he knew of Mr. Van Buren, he 

had not a doubt that he would thus accept the nomination, 

if the Convention should offer it to him, nor that he would 

give his most cordial support to the cause, if any other in- 

dividual should receive the nomination. He then read a 
letter, which Mr. Van Buren had, of his own accord, ad- 
dressed to the New York delegation, in which he evidently 

threw himself wholly into the cause, in a manner which at 
once conciliated the unhesitating confidence of us all, that 

he was with us, and his name was before the Convention, in 
a manner that was entirely satisfactory. 

Mr. Hale had written a letter, confiding the disposal of his 
name before the Convention, unreservedly, to the united 
judgment of Samuel Lewis, H. B. Stanton, G. C. Fogg, and 
myself, and we had unanimously agreed that it would be our 
duty to place his name before the Convention, on precisely 
the same terms with Mr. Van Buren’s, This was done by 
Mr. Stanton. Judge McLean’s name was absolutely with- 
drawn, by Mr. Chase, who, however, stated, that the judge 
was wholly and earnestly with us. ‘The roll was then called, 
each delegate voting, viva voce, as an experiment, prepara- 
tory to the regular or binding vote. The result gave Mr. 
Van Buren a plurality of about 40 above Mr. Hale, and a 
majority of 22 above all others. Many of Mr. Hale’s friends 
had become so fully satisfied, that the interests of the com- 
mon cause would be best promoted by giving the nomination 
to Mr. Van Buren, that they voted for him, even on the in- 
formal trial, thinking it might have an ill effect, if he should 
not have a handsome majority on this vote. 

On the announcement of the result, which was received 
with considerate forbearance by the majority, the eyes of our 
friends were turned to me, and with a general willingness 
that L should have the honor of closing this business, by the 
voluntary surrender of Mr. Hale. And, with the advice of a 


Se 


- 


47 


few of those friends whose councils have never misled us, I 
mounted the platform, to perform one of the most solemn 
acts of my life. After giving a very brief sketch of the 
objects, principles, and history of the Liberty Party, and of 
Mr. Hale, I said, that this union had fully embodied in its 
platform, both our essential principles and our policy—inde- 
pendent organization in favor of Liberty and against Slavery, 
irrespective of our former party connections. We had fully 
redeemed our pledges of honor to Mr. Hale, who agreed with 
us, in doing ‘‘every thing for the cause, and nothing for 
men.” 1 knew I was acting in entire accordance with his 
wishes, in making a motion that the result of the informal 
ballot should be recorded, and that Mr. Van Buren should be 
unanimously nominated as our candidate for the Presidency, 
The delight and enthusiasm with which this was responded 
to, was full of hope for our cause. I shall never forget the 
scene. | 

A member of the Ohio delegation now proposed that Hon. 
Cuarves Francis Apams, of Massachusetts, be our candi- 
date for Vice President. A speech from Rev. Edward 
Smith, of Ohio, urging, that as the Liberty party had secured 
their principles, it was no more than fair to give others the 
men, and that, as we were a party for ‘‘ principles, not men,” 
we had got all we wanted, carried the conference as with a 
whirlwind. I confess I was one of the first to yield to its 
resistless power. And so our work was done. 

I cannot describe, language cannot express the spirit of 
that Convention. I have met with no man who will say, that 
he has ever witnessed its equal. Christian men of the high- 
est character, declared that they were never more impressed 
with the manifest presence of the Divine Spirit. All our 
Liberty party brethren, so far as I know, who were present, 
are fully assured that it is well done, and that, if the whole 
party could have been present, there would not have been a 
dissenting voice, nor a divided heart among us, im giving our 
enthusiastic support to our new ticket, 


. VAN BUREN AND ADAMS. 


The Liberty party of 1840 is not dead. It has expanded 
into the great Union party, or Free Democracy of 1848, 
What have we lost? Not one of our principles—not one of 
our aims—not one of our men. Let John P. Hale stand as 
he stood, in the Senate of the United States; he is young 
enough to bide his time, and we could not spare him to be 


‘Rie 


48 


elected to the Presidency now. We have gained every thing, 
lost nothing. Let us do our duty in these new relations, 
which the Providence of God, and the misconduct of men 
have brought us into. In this union of freemen, for the 
defence of free soil, those who do the best service, will have 
the most effect in forming its character ; and those will be the 
leaders who are foremost in the cause. The power which 
has transferred us, will sustain us. Iam sure that if Myron 
Holley had lived to see this day, he would have rejoiced, as 
Ido. By this movement, our cause is advanced, in a day, to 
a higher position, than we could have achieved by the labor 
of seven years, at our former rate of progress. ‘he eyes of 
the whole nation are now turned upon us, and all the best 
hearts in the world wish us success. If we could only inspire 
the confident hope which truth would justify, we could not 
fail of immediate success. If all whose hearts are with us, 
would vote with us, and if all who desire our triumph, would 
give their best efforts to secure it, our ticket would prevail, 
by an overwhelming majority. Let no man, who values his 
accountability to God or man, bring upon his soul the guilt 
of a failure to vote against both Taylor and Cass, in these 
momentous issues. 

I know there are scores of questions about this matter, 
which you would be glad to ask, and I should be equally 
glad to answer. But it will not do to protract this letter. I 
shall meet as many of you, face to face, as I shall have the 
ability to see, before the election, and will tell you much 
more than I can write. 

I remain your devoted and humble servant, in the cause of 
“ Free Sort, Free Lasor, Free Seeecn, anp Free Men,” 


JOSHUA LEAVITT. 
Rochester, N. Y., August 12, 184%, 





ik 
t 
} 
YW 
oa 
i 
% 
+ 





‘iliag 





Mano 
a Be 4 



























































- ee as. < 2 ae ¥ 5 roe 
> : > ; 3 3 % s =a 4 

, & : ri 

ad = ie 4 r : ‘ - 3 
y 4 "ey + ie EY 
= 3 pate ni < 2 : 
= = ss 
i & 
3 - > He e 
* 7 ; 3 








